[rules-users] Drools Salience and no-loop

[Wolfgang Laun]

Could be there is a race condition in the builder.

I would not use a changeset unless you really need dynamic changes of your
rules.
Simply feed the builder with DRL or whatever, create the Knowledge Base and
then
the sessions.

-W


On 9 March 2012 17:25, gboro54 <gboro54 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Perhaps I am building my packages weird but if all my drl/dslr are under
> the
> same package the salience is honored and all the rules are fired in order.
> Why would it work in this way? Since changing all the files to the same
> package I have done 10 runs of the test with 100% success. Am I building
> the
> kBase in weird manner(I don't think so but look below):
>
>
>                if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
>                        logger.debug("Knowledge base with the following
> changeset was requested
> built "
>                                        + changeset);
>                }
>                KnowledgeBuilder kbuilder = KnowledgeBuilderFactory
>                                .newKnowledgeBuilder();
>
>  kbuilder.add(ResourceFactory.newClassPathResource(changeset),
>                                ResourceType.CHANGE_SET);
>                KnowledgeBuilderErrors errors = kbuilder.getErrors();
>                if (errors.size() > 0) {
>                        StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
>                        for (KnowledgeBuilderError error : errors) {
>                                sb.append(error + "\n");
>                                logger.error(error);
>                        }
>                        throw new IllegalArgumentException("Could not parse
> knowledge. \n"
>                                        + sb);
>                }
>                KnowledgeBase kbase =
> KnowledgeBaseFactory.newKnowledgeBase();
>                kbase.addKnowledgePackages(kbuilder.getKnowledgePackages());
>                return kbase;
>
> Would this cause any fragmenting when the engine is indexing the rules for
> activation? I would think not. I am just going by the current results I
> have
> gotten by declaring all rules in the same package.
>
>
>
>
> laune wrote
> >
> > Salience is a field in the Activation object, used for ranking another
> > entry when it is inserted into the List. Looking at the package name for
> > this or at this time would be futile.
> > -W
> >
> > On 9 March 2012 16:44, gboro54 &lt;gboro54@&gt; wrote:
> >
> >> No I am not using CEP and I didn't think STREAM mode made a difference.
> I
> >> am
> >> just as perplexed as you on why this is happening. Could it be salience
> >> is
> >> only respected in the same package(these are in different packages )? I
> >> am
> >> just taking a stab in the dark at this point. I generated audit logs and
> >> it
> >> can be seen that the removal rule activation is created first and
> >> executed
> >> first(it looks like 75% of the time based on my test this occurs)
> >>
> >>
> >> laune wrote
> >> >
> >> > It's difficult to imagine that doing the same thing with equal facts
> in
> >> > identically configured sessions would create differing objects. And it
> >> > was the intent of my questions to unearth some irregularity, and to
> >> > narrow it down.
> >> >
> >> > STREAM mode shouldn't matter as you aren't using windows, expiry
> >> > or other CEP features - or are you?
> >> >
> >> > -W
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 9 March 2012 15:53, gboro54 &lt;gboro54@&gt; wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> All sessions are against the same kBase. When I say replicate I mean
> I
> >> >> create
> >> >> 10000 separate Orders all the same way(same values for all
> >> properties).
> >> I
> >> >> have not tried to insert all into one session and fire but can try if
> >> >> this
> >> >> really makes a difference(though I am not sure why it should). I will
> >> add
> >> >> an
> >> >> update to 1 as well but again I am not sure why this would matter to
> a
> >> >> low
> >> >> ranking rule who does not care about the actual values from that rule
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> View this message in context:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-Salience-and-no-loop-tp3812723p3812869.html
> >> >> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> >> rules-users at .jboss
> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> > rules-users at .jboss
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >>
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-Salience-and-no-loop-tp3812723p3813013.html
> >> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> rules-users at .jboss
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users at .jboss
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-Salience-and-no-loop-tp3812723p3813137.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120309/81880f37/attachment.html