On 30 March 2011 12:47, marc <marc.strabin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I was using only one fireAllRules() after insert(message) and not
fireUntilHalt(). But is should be enough : as the rule change & update the
fact, the rule is applied again (10 seconds later, and not 1second).
If there are no timers, fireAllRules() terminates as soon as all pending
activations have been fired. Changing a fact later on will create activations,
but not fire rules.
With fireUntilHalt() the rule work fine (and without timer)... but it burns
the CPU (the java process reach 50% on a bi-proc) while a simple call to
fireAllRues() after the timer update use nothing... This doesn't make sense
to me because the drools engine is only notified of a fact modification only
1 time per second (the timer update), so it should only fire all rules a
this moment and that all (just like a fireAllRules() after the
update(SimpleClock) does), so why does it takes so much CPU ? I can post the
code but I should open a other thread because it not the same "problem" ?
Another known problem, I think. I don't see anything like that while
using a (my)
build from a developer baaseline about 6 weeks ago.
About adding log to trace the values of endDate, the traces show correct
values. But it doesn't trace the value viewed by the drools engine itself
wich could be different (just as if I don't do an update() after a
modification)
Sorry, but your way of expressing yourself beats me again.
-W
Marc
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/The-update-function-i...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users