[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4169) Can't compile large .drl files with security manager turned on in tomcat
by Anthony Bruno (Jira)
Anthony Bruno created DROOLS-4169:
-------------------------------------
Summary: Can't compile large .drl files with security manager turned on in tomcat
Key: DROOLS-4169
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-4169
Project: Drools
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 7.22.0.Final
Environment: Java 11
Tomcat 9
Ubuntu 18.10/Amazon Linux AMI
Reporter: Anthony Bruno
Assignee: Mario Fusco
Reproduction repository: https://github.com/AussieGuy0/drools-bug
*Summary*
When large rule (.drl) files are complied **with** the security manager turned
on in a servlet container (e.g. Tomcat), it causes `AccessControlExceptions`, which causes `NoClassDefFoundErrors`.
*Steps*
Prereqs: Program is run in servlet context (e.g .war file in tomcat)
1. Turn on security manager
2. Provide policy files through the properties `java.security.policy` and `kie.security.policy`
3. Compile a `.drl` file that has more than `parallelRulesBuildThreshold` (default: 10) rules
*Expected Result*
Rules are compiled successfully
*Actual Result*
No class def error
*Cause*
In `KnowledgeBuilderImpl`, a `ForkJoinPool` is created and used for parallel building.
A `ForkJoinPool` with no `ForkJoinWorkerThreadFactory` specified, it will use a default factory
that provides it's own permissions. These permissions are not sufficient for compiling
drl files in a servlet context.
*Potential Fix*
A potential fix is to allow the user to provide their own `ForkJoinWorkerThreadFactory` as a
configuration option for drools.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (WFCORE-4518) Ensure the ServiceTarget is stable for the subsystem test KernelServices
by James Perkins (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-4518?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
James Perkins commented on WFCORE-4518:
---------------------------------------
This branch has some work done on it however the failures still seem to be persistent https://github.com/jamezp/wildfly-core/tree/WFCORE-4518. With these changes the same failures seem to happen and the missing service varies between {{org.wildfly.io.worker.default}} and {{org.wildfly.io.worker.default-remoting}} both of which are defined in the test itself.
{code}
testEndpointConfigurationViaSubsystemRoot(org.jboss.as.remoting.RemotingSubsystemTestCase) Time elapsed: 0.031 s <<< ERROR!
org.jboss.as.controller.OperationFailedException:
"WFLYCTL0441: Operation has resulted in failed or missing services
WFLYCTL0448: 1 additional services are down due to their dependencies being missing or failed" [ "WFLYCTL0441: Operation has resulted in failed or missing services
WFLYCTL0448: 1 additional services are down due to their dependencies being missing or failed" ]
at org.jboss.as.model.test.ModelTestKernelServicesImpl.executeForResult(ModelTestKernelServicesImpl.java:238)
at org.jboss.as.remoting.RemotingSubsystemTestCase.testEndpointConfigurationViaSubsystemRoot(RemotingSubsystemTestCase.java:259)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:566)
at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:50)
at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:47)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:17)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325)
at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:78)
at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:57)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:128)
at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:27)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCore.run(JUnitCore.java:55)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.createRequestAndRun(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:137)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.executeEager(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:107)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:83)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:75)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreProvider.invoke(JUnitCoreProvider.java:158)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:383)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:344)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:125)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:417)
{code}
Without the second commit in the testing branch the {{WorkerService.stop()}} throws an exception. It's possible we want to get that fix in regardless as I suppose there is a potential that leaves open an Xnio worker.
> Ensure the ServiceTarget is stable for the subsystem test KernelServices
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFCORE-4518
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-4518
> Project: WildFly Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Test Suite
> Reporter: James Perkins
> Assignee: James Perkins
> Priority: Major
>
> There is potential that an operation is executed for a runtime resource in the subsystem tests if the {{ServiceTarget}} is not yet stable. Using a {{StabilityMonitor}} should fix this issue.
> Example stack trace when a test fails
> {code}
> org.jboss.as.controller.OperationFailedException: undefined [ undefined ]
> at org.jboss.as.model.test.ModelTestKernelServicesImpl.executeForResult(ModelTestKernelServicesImpl.java:238)
> at org.jboss.as.remoting.RemotingSubsystemTestCase.testEndpointConfigurationViaSubsystemRoot(RemotingSubsystemTestCase.java:258)
> at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:566)
> at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:50)
> at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
> at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:47)
> at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:17)
> at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325)
> at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:78)
> at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:57)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
> at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:128)
> at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCore.run(JUnitCore.java:55)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.createRequestAndRun(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:137)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.executeEager(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:107)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:83)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:75)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreProvider.invoke(JUnitCoreProvider.java:158)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:383)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:344)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:125)
> at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:417)
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4168) [DMN Designer] Documentation - Add an image to documentation cover
by Guilherme Gomes (Jira)
Guilherme Gomes created DROOLS-4168:
---------------------------------------
Summary: [DMN Designer] Documentation - Add an image to documentation cover
Key: DROOLS-4168
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-4168
Project: Drools
Issue Type: Task
Components: DMN Editor
Reporter: Guilherme Gomes
Assignee: Guilherme Gomes
Currently, we're not showing any image in the documentation cover (in the DMN Documentation).
The expected result is to have a logo in the cover (following the template provided by the UX team).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-3731) DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
by Guilherme Gomes (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Guilherme Gomes edited comment on DROOLS-3731 at 6/12/19 4:18 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- when a single test is executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup that [~zhutaojiajia] proposed seems to cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is working as expected, and which element doesn't.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
was (Author: karreiro):
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- when a single test is executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup that [~zhutaojiajia] proposed seems to cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is passes, and which element does not work as expected.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
> DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-3731
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: DMN Editor
> Reporter: Elizabeth Clayton
> Assignee: Tao Zhu
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ScenarioSimulation, UX, UXTeam, drools-tools
> Attachments: Screen Shot 2019-05-29 at 2.49.21 PM.png, colors.png, download (1).png, download.png, multi.gif, single.gif, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.02.19.png, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png
>
>
> As a practitioner, there are situations where I need to show additional information about a model... for instance: test coverage report: I need to draw a model and color code the nodes to show which nodes were executed by tests, or which rows on a DT were a match. Or when I execute a single test, what was the actual value of a given node or expression.
> Note: Maybe in read-only mode with an "overlay" on top of the model the additional metadata information. See process instance diagram design examples.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-3731) DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
by Guilherme Gomes (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Guilherme Gomes edited comment on DROOLS-3731 at 6/12/19 4:18 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- when a single test is executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup that [~zhutaojiajia] proposed seems to cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is passes, and which element does not work as expected.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
was (Author: karreiro):
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- when a single test is executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup that [~zhutaojiajia] proposed seem to cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is passes, and which element does not work as expected.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
> DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-3731
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: DMN Editor
> Reporter: Elizabeth Clayton
> Assignee: Tao Zhu
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ScenarioSimulation, UX, UXTeam, drools-tools
> Attachments: Screen Shot 2019-05-29 at 2.49.21 PM.png, colors.png, download (1).png, download.png, multi.gif, single.gif, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.02.19.png, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png
>
>
> As a practitioner, there are situations where I need to show additional information about a model... for instance: test coverage report: I need to draw a model and color code the nodes to show which nodes were executed by tests, or which rows on a DT were a match. Or when I execute a single test, what was the actual value of a given node or expression.
> Note: Maybe in read-only mode with an "overlay" on top of the model the additional metadata information. See process instance diagram design examples.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-3731) DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
by Guilherme Gomes (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Guilherme Gomes edited comment on DROOLS-3731 at 6/12/19 4:17 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- when a single test is executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup you proposed seems cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is passes, and which element does not work as expected.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
was (Author: karreiro):
Hi [~uxdlc],
Thanks for the mockups [~zhutaojiajia].
IIUC what [~tirelli] commented, we have two types of scenarios:
- When a single test can be executed:
!single.gif|thumbnail!
- and when several tests are executed:
!multi.gif|thumbnail!
The mockup you proposed seems cover both scenarios above:
!屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png|thumbnail!
Personally, I think it's important to use some colors (red/yellow/green) here:
!colors.png|thumbnail!
..to show which element is passes, and which element does not work as expected.
Regarding the use of popovers. As we can see in the GIFs above, we already have some useful popovers in the test scenario. So, it's just a matter o checking with the PO if they are enough (as a user, I think that they are enough) ;-)
> DMN UX - More info overlaid on models.
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-3731
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3731
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: DMN Editor
> Reporter: Elizabeth Clayton
> Assignee: Tao Zhu
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ScenarioSimulation, UX, UXTeam, drools-tools
> Attachments: Screen Shot 2019-05-29 at 2.49.21 PM.png, colors.png, download (1).png, download.png, multi.gif, single.gif, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.02.19.png, 屏幕快照 2019-06-11 下午3.10.26.png
>
>
> As a practitioner, there are situations where I need to show additional information about a model... for instance: test coverage report: I need to draw a model and color code the nodes to show which nodes were executed by tests, or which rows on a DT were a match. Or when I execute a single test, what was the actual value of a given node or expression.
> Note: Maybe in read-only mode with an "overlay" on top of the model the additional metadata information. See process instance diagram design examples.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
7 years, 1 month