[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4799) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties
by Jozef Marko (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4799?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Jozef Marko commented on DROOLS-4799:
-------------------------------------
[~uxdlc] Hello, thank you for your comment. I agree with first two points. I think I am different opinion about "We don't try to convert values from expression to form-based.", because we do (try to do) conversion in DMN constraints. However it may me difficult to implement it. If [~yamer] say it is too big task, then I am fine with your proposal.
> Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-4799
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4799
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing, Test Scenarios Editor
> Reporter: Yeser Amer
> Assignee: Elizabeth Clayton
> Priority: Major
> Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools
> Attachments: Screen Shot 2019-11-26 at 1.26.54 PM.png, dmn-dt-enumeration-constraint.png, dmn-dt-expression-constraint.png, expression-list_error.png, scesim-list.png
>
>
> I need a clarification regarding the behaviour of the updated Collection Editor, in particular for this section -->https://marvelapp.com/5ab248j/screen/62093042/layer/102496330.
> Considering the editor introduces a new way to handle a Collection ("Define List"), can you please give us detailed behaviour for the following case:
> - What happen if a user starts to input data inside a section (Define List/Create List) and then switch on the other one?
> eg. if I start to define a List using "Define List" option (i.e. an expression) and then I change to "Create List" case. What should happen?
> - Currently, after adding a Collection, the Grid cell will show "List (1)". It should be the same for "Define list" (i.e. Expression) case?
> In case of additional clarificaiton, I'll update this ticket.
> Hope it's clear, if not you can contact me anytime.
> Thanks
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFWIP-287) MP Fault Tolerance - Hystrix is initialized by random module from EAR
by Radoslav Husar (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-287?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Radoslav Husar closed WFWIP-287.
--------------------------------
Resolution: Rejected
Rejecting this, as {{initialize-in-order}} deals with EE component initialization sequencing and has nothing to do with deployment order where MP Config properties are applied. So, this is not a valid way to ensure a certain configuration.
> MP Fault Tolerance - Hystrix is initialized by random module from EAR
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFWIP-287
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-287
> Project: WildFly WIP
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: MP Config
> Reporter: Miroslav Novak
> Assignee: Radoslav Husar
> Priority: Critical
>
> If EAR container 2 MP FT modules where each has different configuration for Hystrix then it is initialized by randomly and does not respect module deployment order defined in {{META-INF/application.xml}}:
> {code}
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <application xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/application_6.xsd"
> version="6">
> <initialize-in-order>true</initialize-in-order>
> <module>
> <web>
> <web-uri>first-module.war</web-uri>
> <context-root>first-module</context-root>
> </web>
> </module>
> <module>
> <web>
> <web-uri>second-module.war</web-uri>
> <context-root>second-module</context-root>
> </web>
> </module>
> </application>
> {code}
> It's expected that first-module would configured Hystric based on above application.xml.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 7 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-1221) Add fail-safe and scalability functionality to the Drools (CEP) rules engine
by Tom Pijl (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-1221?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Tom Pijl closed DROOLS-1221.
----------------------------
> Add fail-safe and scalability functionality to the Drools (CEP) rules engine
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-1221
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-1221
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: core engine
> Affects Versions: 6.4.0.Final
> Environment: Drools (CEP) Rule engine 6.4.0.Final
> Reporter: Tom Pijl
> Assignee: Mario Fusco
> Priority: Major
>
> The Drools Rule engine is currently not fail-safe and scalable which is a requirement for Cloud deployment.
> Add a possibility to persist the state of the working memory after each state change (perhaps linked to the fireAllRules()?) and related to that the possibility to restore the state in case of a crash (fail-safe requirement).
> This persistent state store can also be used to synchronize multiple engine instances (scalability requirement).
> Of course this has major impact on the performance of the engine, but it is the only way to make the engine useful in a multi-tenant Cloud environment
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 7 months