January 2020 - jboss-jira - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko updated DROOLS-4698: -------------------------------- Attachment: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-20-30.png > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png, Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-20-30.png, urgent.dmn > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko commented on DROOLS-4698: ------------------------------------- h3. Manual review comment 2 Scrollbars in the popup do not work rolling wheel on mouse. User can just click on it and drag manually. !Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-20-30.png|thumbnail! > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png, Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-20-30.png, urgent.dmn > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4611) It is impossible to use infinity values

by Daniele Zonca (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4611?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Daniele Zonca updated DROOLS-4611: ---------------------------------- Sprint: 2020 Week 01-03 (from Dec 30) > It is impossible to use infinity values > --------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4611 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4611 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Anna Dupliak > Assignee: Daniele Zonca > Priority: Major > Labels: ScenarioSimulation, drools-tools > Attachments: screenshot-1.png, screenshot-2.png > > > It is impossible to use infinity values. > *workaround > If one expect some infinity value as a result -> they could compare it with the "1/0" expression -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko edited comment on DROOLS-4698 at 1/8/20 8:18 AM: ------------------------------------------------------------- h3. Manual review comment 1 If I am trying to create a test scenario for [^urgent.dmn] I am getting !Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png|thumbnail! even when I am creating tests scenario for the first time. was (Author: jomarko): h3. Manual review comment 1 - If I am trying to create a test scenario for [^urgent.dmn] I am getting !Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png|thumbnail! even when I am creating tests scenario for the first time. > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png, urgent.dmn > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko commented on DROOLS-4698: ------------------------------------- h3. Manual review comment 1 - If I am trying to create a test scenario for [^urgent.dmn] I am getting !Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png|thumbnail! even when I am creating tests scenario for the first time. > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png, urgent.dmn > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko updated DROOLS-4698: -------------------------------- Attachment: urgent.dmn > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png, urgent.dmn > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4698) Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties

by Jozef Marko (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Jozef Marko updated DROOLS-4698: -------------------------------- Attachment: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png > Adding "expression" type handling for Collection type propereties > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4698 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4698 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Scenario Simulation and Testing > Reporter: Yeser Amer > Assignee: Yeser Amer > Priority: Major > Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools > Attachments: Screenshot from 2020-01-08 14-14-05.png > > > Support is about both drools/java collections and dmn collections. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (WFWIP-290) Response Content-Type is 'application/json' even when HTTP request defines 'application/json-patch+json' "Accept" header

by Paul Ferraro (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-290?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ] Paul Ferraro commented on WFWIP-290: ------------------------------------ {quote} when sending "Accept: application/*", then HTTP 200 is returned with "application/yaml" Content-Type. Is this behavior wanted?{quote} Yes. > Response Content-Type is 'application/json' even when HTTP request defines 'application/json-patch+json' "Accept" header > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: WFWIP-290 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-290 > Project: WildFly WIP > Issue Type: Bug > Components: MP OpenAPI > Reporter: Fabio Burzigotti > Assignee: Paul Ferraro > Priority: Major > > When sending HTTP request header "Accept: application/json-patch+json", "Content-Type: application/json" response is returned. > This behavior seems to be less strict compared to what is defined by the spec, as it states "application/json" is specifically needed in order to get the same value back from server. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-12486) Memory leak in OpenTracing when deployment is redeployed multiple times

by Miroslav Novak (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-12486?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ] Miroslav Novak commented on WFLY-12486: --------------------------------------- [~ehugonnet] thanks, I've tried WF build from https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/12878 and do not see any memory/thread leak. > Memory leak in OpenTracing when deployment is redeployed multiple times > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: WFLY-12486 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-12486 > Project: WildFly > Issue Type: Bug > Components: MP OpenTracing > Affects Versions: 17.0.0.Final, 17.0.1.Final, 18.0.1.Final > Reporter: Jan Stourac > Assignee: Emmanuel Hugonnet > Priority: Blocker > Fix For: 19.0.0.Beta1 > > Attachments: memory-leak-bad.png, memory-leak-good.png, wildfly-thread-leak.png > > > There seems to be a memory leak when a deployment is redeployed multiple times (100 times in our test). This is very similar to what has been described in WFLY-10991. Also first commit this started to happen is [this one|https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/commit/74170b5f49dd83f6b9ebd489f85...] - JaegerTracing and Apache Thrift dependencies update. Thus I selected MP OpenTracing component for this issue. > Test and deployment is same as is described in WFLY-10991. > Size of the extra heap in use is about 27MB plus when compared to the initial size before multiple redeploy operations. > I've tried to check manually via [visualVM|https://visualvm.github.io/] tool. Screenshot with suspicious jaegertracing instances are attached - there are much more jaegertracing class instances with new version of Jager Tracing and Apache Thrift dependencies, which is suspicious. > Interesting thing is that when microprofile-opentracing-smallrye subsystem is removed via: > {code} > /subsystem=microprofile-opentracing-smallrye:remove() > {code} > the memory leak is still present. This is kind of confusing to me. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4909) Infinite recursion in drools after version change from v7.20 to v7.21

by Crosson David (Jira)

[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4909?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Crosson David edited comment on DROOLS-4909 at 1/8/20 7:13 AM: --------------------------------------------------------------- I was able to reproduce the issue, by reaching the same level of complexity as for our original KB : [^toto.drl] the kmodule.xml config : <kbase name="HelloKB" packages="dummy" eventProcessingMode="stream" equalsBehavior="equality"> <ksession name="HelloKS" default="true"/> </kbase> was (Author: dacr): I was able to reproduce the issue, by reaching the same level of complexity as for our original KB : [^toto.drl] > Infinite recursion in drools after version change from v7.20 to v7.21 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DROOLS-4909 > URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4909 > Project: Drools > Issue Type: Bug > Components: core engine > Affects Versions: 7.21.0.Final, 7.22.0.Final, 7.23.0.Final, 7.25.0.Final, 7.31.0.Final > Environment: Both Mac and Windows > Reporter: Crosson David > Assignee: Mario Fusco > Priority: Major > Attachments: Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 3.53.10 PM.png, Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 5.56.32 PM.png, Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 5.59.28 PM.png, error.png, pojo.png, static.png, static_error.png, toto.drl > > > https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4288 > The problem is not fully solved, I got a forever loop on my KB since 7.21.0.Final, I tried with 7.25.0.Final but without success, and the issue is still here with 7.31.0.Final. Will go back to release 7.20.0.Final > (the only fix I can apply is to add no-loop clause to my rules although it shouldn't be necessary). > I can't share the affected KB, and unfortunately I was unable to reproduce the issue loop on a smaller example > The affected rule looks like : > {{rule "reset metric to max score when no more issues are present" > //no-loop // TODO - no-loop TO BE REMOVED AS IT SHOULDN'T BE NECESSARY > when > Something($id:identity, $origin:origin) > not Issue($id == identity, $origin == origin, category!="metrics") > $scoring: Scoring(name == "performance", $id == identity, $origin == origin) > then > modify($scoring) > { setValue(100.0); } > end}} > ---- > from https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4288 : > When there is a version change in drools-compiler from `7.20.0.Final` to `7.21.0.Final` some rules are looping recursively. > *Code in github:* > [The working version|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/tree/issue_v_7.20] > [The recursively looping version|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/tree/issue_v_7.21] > [The change between working and looping version|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/compare/issue_v...] > *More details* > When I fire a rule whose `then` part modifies a fact that is already checked in the `when` part: > {code:java} > rule "rule 1.1" > when > $sampleDomain: SampleDomain(instanceVariable2 == "Value of instance variable") > then > System.out.println("Rule 1.1 fired"); > modify($sampleDomain){ > setInstanceVariable1(3) > } > end > {code} > it doesn't loop recursively. > But when I call another rule which call a static function from another class: > {code:java} > rule "rule 1.2" > when > $sampleDomain: SampleDomain(CoreUtils.anotherFunction()) > then > System.out.println("Rule 1.2 fired"); > modify($sampleDomain){ > setInstanceVariable1(3) > } > end > {code} > it loops recursively. > The class with static function is > {code:java} > import com.drool_issue.domain.SampleDomain; > public class CoreUtils { > > public static boolean anotherFunction() { > System.out.println("anotherFunction() inside CoreUtils"); > return true; > } > > public static boolean anotherFunction(SampleDomain sampleDomain) { > System.out.println("anotherFunction(SampleDomain sampleDomain) inside CoreUtils"); > return true; > } > } > {code} > My domain file is: > {code:java} > public class SampleDomain { > private int instanceVariable1; > private String instanceVariable2; > private int instanceVariable3; > > > public int getInstanceVariable1() { > return instanceVariable1; > } > public void setInstanceVariable1(int instanceVariable1) { > this.instanceVariable1 = instanceVariable1; > } > public String getInstanceVariable2() { > return instanceVariable2; > } > public void setInstanceVariable2(String instanceVariable2) { > this.instanceVariable2 = instanceVariable2; > } > public int getInstanceVariable3() { > return instanceVariable3; > } > public void setInstanceVariable3(int instanceVariable3) { > this.instanceVariable3 = instanceVariable3; > } > > > } > {code} > This is only caused after version change from `7.20.0.Final` to `7.21.0.Final`. Any guess on what the problem might be? > When I further looked into the problem I saw this too. > When we add two functions into the `SampleDomain` class ie > {code:java} > public boolean anotherFunction() { > return true; > } > > public boolean anotherFunction(SampleDomain sampleDomain) { > return true; > } > {code} > and use this in the rule like: > {code:java} > rule "rule 1.4" > when > $sampleDomain: SampleDomain(anotherFunction()) > then > System.out.println("Rule 1.4 fired"); > modify($sampleDomain){ > setInstanceVariable1(3) > } > end > {code} > and > {code:java} > rule "rule 1.5" > when > $sampleDomain: SampleDomain(anotherFunction($sampleDomain)) > then > System.out.println("Rule 1.5 fired"); > modify($sampleDomain){ > setInstanceVariable3(4) > } > end > {code} > these also loops recursively. > *Code in github:* > [The recursive looping when using non static methods|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/tree/issue_v_7....] > [The change between working and above version|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/compare/issue_v...] > Also when any of the static method is made non static then method from the domain class is called even though the static method is specified in the rule. > *Code portions to be noted here are:* > [Rule where static method is called.|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/blob/bde2804b25...] > [Another rule which also call the static method.|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/blob/bde2804b25...] > [The static access modifier removed from the functions which where previously static.|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/compare/issue_v...] > *Code in github:* > [Weird behaviour when removing static modifier for the functions.|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/tree/issue_v...] > [The change between working and above version|https://github.com/padippist/DroolsIssueReporting/compare/issue_v...] > *All this are caused in versions after `7.20.0.Final`, ie `7.21.0.Final`, `7.22.0.Final` and `7.23.0.Final`* -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)

4 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-jira January 2020