[rules-users] Problem with Negative Patterns and Temporal Constraints

[Mark Proctor]

On 17/01/2012 08:27, Weiss, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> Thank you for the quick answer! This makes absolutely sense and the 
> rules work now as expected.
>
> Unfortunately, I was not able to find this somewhere in the 
> documentation. It would be nice to see it in the documentation of 
> drools fusion.
>
Documentation is something anyone can do with a spare 10 minutes:
1) install git
2) install xmlmind
3) "fork" drools on github, https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools
4) clone your fork locally
5) make changes to files with xmlmind, or xml editor of choice
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools/tree/master/drools-docs/drools-fusion-docs/src/main/docbook/en-US
6) commit changes, push changes back to github
7) use github gui to submit a pull request for your changes.

It'll be more obvious to users what documentation is missing, and 
they'll be able to word it better in a way that makes more sense to 
other users.

Mark
>
> Best,
>
> Wolfgang
>
> *Von:*rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org 
> [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] *Im Auftrag von *Wolfgang 
> Laun
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 16. Jänner 2012 15:58
> *An:* Rules Users List
> *Betreff:* Re: [rules-users] Problem with Negative Patterns and 
> Temporal Constraints
>
> I don't see that the "not" CE excludes the AnalysisCue bound to $cue 
> from being
> matched by the pattern inside the "not". I recommend using
>
> *   not*(AnalysisCue(*this != $cue*, this after[0ms,2500ms] $cue) from
>
> since "[0ms,..." does not inhibit the same event being matched by both 
> patterns,
> which precludes the rule from firing.
>
> -W
>
> 2012/1/16 Weiss, Wolfgang <Wolfgang.Weiss at joanneum.at 
> <mailto:Wolfgang.Weiss at joanneum.at>>
>
> Hi all!
>
> We have the problem that the following rule never fires:
>
> *rule*"test-rule"
>
> *agenda-group* "evaluation"
>
> *salience* 100
>
> *when*
>
>              $cue : AnalysisCue() *from* entry-point "LowLevelCueStream"
>
> *not*(AnalysisCue(*this* after[0ms,2500ms] $cue) *from* entry-point 
> "LowLevelCueStream")
>
> *then*
>
>              logger.debug("... some message ..");
>
> *end*
>
> We found out that the problem is the combination of the negation with 
> the conditional element "not" and the temporal constraint 
> "[0ms,2500ms]". Using the temporal operator "this after $cue" without 
> a temporal constraint works correct in its semantics.
>
> Interestingly, when adding a constraint (cueType == 1) to the type in 
> the negative pattern the rule begins to work. The rule would look like 
> as follows:
>
> *rule*"test-rule"
>
> *agenda-group* "evaluation"
>
> *salience* 100
>
> *when*
>
>              $cue : AnalysisCue() *from* entry-point "LowLevelCueStream"
>
> *not*(AnalysisCue(cueType == 1, *this* after[0ms,2500ms] $cue) *from* 
> entry-point "LowLevelCueStream")
>
> *then*
>
>              logger.debug("... some message ..");
>
> *end*
>
> unfortunately the rule then fires with a delay of 4 to 5 seconds. The 
> second parameter of the temporal constraint influences the delay.
>
> When changing the first parameter of the temporal constraint to a 
> value greater than 0 the rule works as expected! The constraint would 
> then look like as follows: "[1ms, 2500ms]". Whereas in our case, we 
> want to evaluate the time window from 0 -- 2500ms.
>
> Our system works in the stream mode and we could reproduce this 
> behaviour with the versions 5.3.1 and 5.4.0 Beta 1.
>
> Can anybody confirm if this is a bug in Drools, or did I overlook here 
> something?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Weiss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20120117/f29a0684/attachment.html