I've done it both with setting the value and forcing salience to evaluate in a certain order and using the update a value with and without salience. It's odd because when I was doing this on a standalone machine in Eclipse it all seemed to work fine, but now that I've moved rules into Guvnor I'm having issues with it. Could there be something I did in calling agenda groups that could have removed the working of salience? Also, I was using no-loop to make sure I didn't run the same rule over and over. It only effects things if the rule has fired for one specific instance, correct? Thank you! From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Michael Anstis Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 10:43 AM To: Rules Users List Subject: Re: [rules-users] Agenda Groups and Salience Do you inform the engine that values have changed in your RHS:- then modify( incomingClaim ) { setMedicare(true); } ... end On 18 March 2011 14:16, Dean Whisnant <dean@basys.com<mailto:dean@basys.com>> wrote: Hello, Are there any conflicts in 5.1 between using salience and agenda groups? I have three sets of rules 1) base software, 2) Trading Partner Specific, 3) Customer Specific. 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. We load all the rules to the knowledge session, letting it know to fire them in that order. 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. 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. 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 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 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 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 So I run a sample file through that hasCOB and should set hasOther to true. Rule #1 fires and creates hasCOB Rule #3 fires and sets hasOther to true and gives me output Rule #5 doesn't fire??? 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. I'm at a loss here and any thoughts/help would be welcomed... Thank you! Dean _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users