Stateless Vs Stateful Sessions in Webtier
by Pritam
It isn't clear from the documentation and examples on the recommended usage
of knowledge sessions. From Michael Bali's book, it is highly recommended to
use StatelessKnowledgeSession, since it's threadsafe, but a quick look at
the API shows that it doesn't support many of the features of stateful
ksession.
-- cannot pass agendaFilter
-- cannot use agenda-group, activation-group or ruleflow-group in statelss
ksession
-- It looks like one cannot get Agenda from a statelss ksession and hence
cannot use clear() or setFocus()
...
Drools says, for rules itself, "it doesn't matter whether you use stateless
or stateful ksession ..." then why is that an entire set of metadata like
grouping and ordering is ignored?
If statefulknowledge session isn't threadsafe, then what are the best
practices and considerations for making it threadsafe?
--
View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Stateless-Vs-Stateful-Sessions-in-Webtier-tp130284p1...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 11 months
- 6
- 9
prevent infinite loops
by Garner, Shawn
Is there a good way to globally prevent infinite loops.
I had rule A and rule B and they both have FactA on the condition.
They also both modify FactA.
I tried no-loop and it prevents a loop of repeating RuleA over and over.
However it then goes from Rule A back to Rule B back to Rule A.
I fixed it by lock-on-active instead of no-loop.
However I was wondering if there was either a timeout feature or a maximum number of times you could set a rule to be executed to error out on infinite loops.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks,
SDG
-----Message Disclaimer-----
This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
reply email to Connect(a)principal.com and delete or destroy all copies of
the original message and attachments thereto. Email sent to or from the
Principal Financial Group or any of its member companies may be retained
as required by law or regulation.
Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an Electronic signature
for purposes of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) or the
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act ("E-Sign")
unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message.
While this communication may be used to promote or market a transaction
or an idea that is discussed in the publication, it is intended to provide
general information about the subject matter covered and is provided with
the understanding that The Principal is not rendering legal, accounting,
or tax advice. It is not a marketed opinion and may not be used to avoid
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. You should consult with
appropriate counsel or other advisors on all matters pertaining to legal,
tax, or accounting obligations and requirements.
15 years, 11 months
- 4
- 3
Checking in one rule the "result" of another rule
by orchid
Hi All,
I have "rule1" and "rule2", very simple rules. I would like in "rule3" to
check one of the following:
"rule1" AND "rule2" (i.e. if both rule1 and rule2 were fired)
"rule1" OR "rule2" (rule1 or rule2 was fired)
How can I achieve this? Does the "extends" keyword might help here?
I achieved that buy defining a list, to which rule1 and rule2 in the RHS
inserted some value. In rule3 I checked the values of that list. I would
like to ask if there are some prettier solutions.
Thanks in advance.
Any help would be appreciated.
--
View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Checking-in-one-rule-the-result-of-another-rule-tp17...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 11 months
- 4
- 5