Failed to get rules from Guvor after apply Security using Tomcat and JAAS
by mujoko mujoko
Dear Rules Users,
Previously, I use guvnor with no security.
Now, my boss wants me to apply security on guvnor.
The way I implement is use this link
http://ngjweb.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/drools-guvnor-manage-access-part-2/
which is using realm of tomcat and create a table is the system for guvnor
user.
I tested from browser, the security is working fine even more than 10 users
access concurrently.
But when my application access the guvnor and try to create the knowledge
base. It's becoming intermittent.
After several time access the guvnor, the guvnor is hang/can not access
even from browser.
Here is the exception I got
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.io.IOException: Server returned HTTP
response code: 401 for URL:
http://localhost:9090/guvnor/org.drools.guvnor.Guvnor/package/com.rbtsb.t...
pCDR-LocalcallWithBRemarks.drl
....
at
org.drools.compiler.PackageBuilder.addKnowledgeResource(PackageBuilder.java:692)
at
org.drools.builder.impl.KnowledgeBuilderImpl.add(KnowledgeBuilderImpl.java:37
The way our app access the guvnor after apply security is as below.
Snipped Code
UrlResource urlResource = (UrlResource)
ResourceFactory.newUrlResource(ruleUrl);
urlResource.setBasicAuthentication("enabled");
urlResource.setUsername("admin");
urlResource.setPassword("admin");
builder.add(urlResource,ResourceType.DRL);
--
Mujoko
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mujoko
14 years, 4 months
Can we edit "view source " option in Drools Guvnor
by Veera
Hi All,
I dont know wheter it is possible or not.
i was create a one Decison Table with 100 rules( 100 rows) , So i want to
copy
this decision table into another new Guvnor
(if i export the repository i am loosing the data which is there already in
new Guvnor )
So my requirement is to copy the Decision table into new Guvnor without
loosing the existing data in
new Guvnor.
(OR) else is there any way to edit the "view source" option , So that i can
copy the code into the new
Guvnor...
Thanks in Advance,
Regards,
Veera
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Can-we-edit-view-source-option-in-Drool...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
14 years, 4 months
Fwd: Re: Guvnor - expected value of a list
by Michael Anstis
sent on the move
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Péter Gombás" <gombas.peter(a)gmail.com>
Date: 15 Feb 2012 07:40
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Guvnor - expected value of a list
To: <michael.anstis(a)gmail.com>
Hello Michael,
yes, it is a Test scenario in Guvnor. In attachment is a very simple
project. Target is to check the resulting list. On the picture you can
see the problem: altough expected values are the same as target the
test is not succesful. Or am i using it not correctly?
Peter
2012/2/14 Michael Anstis <michael.anstis(a)gmail.com>:
> I assume this is a QA \ Test Scenario in Guvnor?
>
> It's going to be helpful if you can provide an export of your repository
(or
> an extract) showing the issue.
>
>
> On 14 February 2012 16:12, gombasp <gombas.peter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have the following problem: i would like to compare a value in expected
>> section of a Guvnor test. Guvnor says actual value is:
>>
>> (Actual: [test1, test1])
>>
>> When i enter [test1, test1] to the expected value it will not match with
>> actual.
>> Is it possible to compare list values? If yes, what is the syntax?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Guvnor-expected-value-of-a-list-tp37441...
>> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
--
Gombás Péter
14 years, 4 months
uninitialized planning value [error]
by Nurlan
Is it possible setting planning entity with uninitialized planning value into
solution?
if it is possible, then how? :)
plz, help me :)
When I execute my code with not null planning variables everything work
fine, but when i execute without setting planning variables I have
[Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException]
------------------------
2012-02-14 17:32:08,119 [main] INFO Solver started: time spend (0), score
(null), new best score (null), random seed (0).
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException
at
org.drools.planner.core.score.definition.HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.calculateTimeGradient(HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.java:73)
at
org.drools.planner.core.score.definition.HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.calculateTimeGradient(HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.java:25)
at
org.drools.planner.core.termination.ScoreAttainedTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(ScoreAttainedTermination.java:52)
at
org.drools.planner.core.termination.OrCompositeTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(OrCompositeTermination.java:70)
at
org.drools.planner.core.termination.OrCompositeTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(OrCompositeTermination.java:70)
at
org.drools.planner.core.termination.PhaseToSolverTerminationBridge.calculatePhaseTimeGradient(PhaseToSolverTerminationBridge.java:49)
at
org.drools.planner.core.localsearch.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase.solve(DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase.java:55)
at
org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.runSolverPhases(DefaultSolver.java:166)
at
org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.solve(DefaultSolver.java:138)
at kz.bee.drools.planner.dating.DatingMain.start(DatingMain.java:58)
at kz.bee.drools.planner.dating.DatingMain.main(DatingMain.java:38)
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/uninitialized-planning-value-error-tp37...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
14 years, 4 months
Problem deploying 5.3.0 drools server in Tomcat
by Ravi Sundaar
Hi,
When I deploy drools-camel-server-5.3.0.Final.war into tomcat (webapps
folder), I see the following problem. I don't have a problem with the 5.3
Guvnor war file. Any idea what might be going on?
INFO: Starting ProtocolHandler ["ajp-apr-8009"]
Feb 6, 2012 9:06:40 PM org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina start
INFO: Server startup in 24453 ms
INFO 06-02 21:07:17,196 (NilAuthenticator.java:authenticate:35) All use
rs are guests.
Feb 6, 2012 9:15:00 PM org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig deployWAR
INFO: Deploying web application archive C:\apache-tomcat-7.0.25\webapps\drools-c
amel-server-5.3.0.Final.war
Feb 6, 2012 9:15:03 PM org.apache.catalina.loader.WebappClassLoader validateJarF
ile
INFO: validateJarFile(C:\apache-tomcat-7.0.25\webapps\drools-camel-server-5.3.0.
Final\WEB-INF\lib\geronimo-servlet_3.0_spec-1.0.jar) - jar not loaded. See Servl
et Spec 2.3, section 9.7.2. Offending class: javax/servlet/Servlet.class
log4j:WARN No appenders could be found for logger (org.springframework.web.conte
xt.ContextLoader).
log4j:WARN Please initialize the log4j system properly.
Thanks,
Ravi.
14 years, 4 months
Fwd: Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to 5.3Final
by Michael Anstis
I suspect ConsumerAccountAssociationFact.hasAnyAccountClosed is a boolean.
In 5.3 we handle data-types better than 5.0, so String, Numbers, Dates are
Booleans have editors appropriate for the data-type and the resulting DRL
only escapes values with quotation marks where needed (i.e. Strings and
Dates). Boolean's in the table are now shown as Checkboxes. If the value is
"true" it is ticked, if the value is "false" the checkbox is not ticked.
I don't therefore believe there is any problem.
On 10 February 2012 16:35, jian zhi <jianpzhi(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Thanks for the quick response. I downloaded the war and tested the fix.
> The order of the conditions are correct now. There is still a small problem
> in the last condition.
>
> In Drools 5.0 the source is consumerAccount :
> ConsumerAccountAssociationFact( hasAnyAccountClosed == "false" ).
> In Drools 5.3 the source is consumerAccount :
> ConsumerAccountAssociationFact( hasAnyAccountClosed == false ). It displays
> a square check box in the cell.
>
> Could you please take a look?
> Thanks,
> Jian
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Michael Anstis <michael.anstis(a)gmail.com>
> *To:* jian zhi <jianpzhi(a)yahoo.com>; Rules Users List <
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 9, 2012 4:55 AM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to
> 5.3Final
>
> You can get a build containing the fix from Nexus:
>
>
> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/index.html#nexus-search;gav~org.drools...
>
> 2012/2/8 jian zhi <jianpzhi(a)yahoo.com>
>
> Mike,
>
> Is it possible to release a patch of 5.3?
>
> Thanks,
> Jian
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Michael Anstis <michael.anstis(a)gmail.com>
> *To:* Rules Users List <rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 8, 2012 3:17 AM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to
> 5.3Final
>
> The problem has existed since 5.2 and would potentially affect loading any
> earlier version.
> Prior to 5.2 the object model used by the guided decision table did not
> hold a Pattern to which individual condition columns are bound.
> The conversion code groups individual condition columns into the
> appropriate group and moves the underlying column data accordingly (as
> there was no guarantee columns with the same bound name were consecutive).
> There was a problem with the creation and insertion of the new Pattern
> objects that relied upon the order of entries in a HashMap being
> consistent. This has now changed.
> I know others have been using the new guided decision table with old
> repositories without problem and our unit tests did not detect the problem
> either.
> AFAIK this is the first report of any such issue since the release of
> 5.2's betas, however I would be wrong to say there is no risk.
> sent on the move
> On 8 Feb 2012 01:22, "vadlam" <sreeram.vadlamudi(a)wellsfargo.com> wrote:
>
> does this issue happen for any previous version of Guvnor data such as 5.0
> or 5.1 or 5.2 exported and imported into a Guvnor 5.3 repository ?
>
> does this mean, we cannot rely on 5.3.0 version of Guvnor code when
> migrating data from a previous version and should rather apply the fix ?
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Migrating-repository-data-f...
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
>
>
14 years, 4 months
