Do you inform the engine that values have changed in your RHS:-<br><br>then<br> modify( incomingClaim ) {<br> setMedicare(true);<br> }<br> ...<br>end<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 18 March 2011 14:16, Dean Whisnant <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dean@basys.com">dean@basys.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">Hello,<br>
<br>
Are there any conflicts in 5.1 between using salience and agenda groups?<br>
<br>
I have three sets of rules 1) base software, 2) Trading Partner Specific, 3) Customer Specific.<br>
<br>
These three sets are split into different Guvnor packages and all of #1 have an agenda group of "base", all of #2 have an agenda group of "tradingpartner" and all of #3 have no agenda group assigned.<br>
<br>
We load all the rules to the knowledge session, letting it know to fire them in that order.<br>
<br>
In my #1 set I have a few hundred rules. About 10 of those rules it matters what individual order they fire in so I was setting up salience for them as well.<br>
<br>
Rule #1 has a salience of 21000 and it's job is to see if this is the first line item of a claim and if so to instantiate a new object, hasCOB.<br>
<br>
Rule #2 has a salience of 20900 and checks to see if the incoming claim is medicare and if so, sets a Boolean, hasMedicare, to true and then does some output so I know if it set it<br>
<br>
Rule #3 has a salience of 20900 and checks to see if the incoming claim is other insurance and if so, sets a Boolean, hasOther, to true and then does some output so i know if it set it<br>
<br>
Rule #4 has a salience of 20800 and looks to see if there is a hasCOB object with hasMedicare = to true and then does output so I know if it worked<br>
<br>
Rule #5 has a salience of 20800 and looks to see if there is a hasCOB object with hasOther = to true and then does output so I know if it worked<br>
<br>
So I run a sample file through that hasCOB and should set hasOther to true.<br>
<br>
Rule #1 fires and creates hasCOB<br>
Rule #3 fires and sets hasOther to true and gives me output<br>
Rule #5 doesn't fire???<br>
<br>
Whether or not salience is the best method to accomplish this, shouldn't this work? DO you see a better way to accomplish this? Rules 4 and 5 are dummy rules here for testing, but what comes next is calculations based upon the existence of hasOther and/or hasMedicare.<br>
<br>
I'm at a loss here and any thoughts/help would be welcomed...<br>
<br>
Thank you!<br>
<br>
Dean<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
rules-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org">rules-users@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>