Re: [rules-users] Rules not firing when facts asserted in a rule RHS in 5.0 - diagnosed with workaround (but not fixed)

Having just looked in the Drools JIRA repository, I pretty sure that it is the same issue as was reported in JBRULES-2140 <https://jira.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-2140>;. That entry has a repro.

I am interested as to what you mean by "right around the corner"?

Here is a repro anyway... <QUOTE> package rulestest global java.util.logging.Logger logger declare QuestionValidation question: String mandatory: Boolean state: String type: String end function void testfunc() { System.out.println("testfunc called"); } rule 'init' dialect "mvel" when eval(true) then QuestionValidation qv = new QuestionValidation(); qv.setState("ss"); qv.setQuestion("qq"); insert(qv); logger.info("Hello world"); end rule 'test' dialect "mvel" when $qv: QuestionValidation() then logger.info("Found a qv " + $qv); end </QUOTE> If the testfunc is present then the "test" rule never fires. If it is not present then the "test" rule fires just fine. Chris On 01/12/2010 21:47, Tihomir Surdilovic wrote: > Hi Chris, could you attach the repository export xml from your repo > that I can use to reproduce the issue with? BRMS 5.1 (supported bits) > is right around the corner and I would be able to tell you if the > issue still persists with the currently tested bits for 5.1. > > Thanks. > Tihomir > > On 12/1/10 4:29 PM, Chris Selwyn wrote: >> Having spent all day on this one, I have finally got to the bottom >> of it. >> >> The problem is reproducible if I have /both/ a declarative fact >> model /and/ a function in my rules. >> It doesn't matter whether the function is called or not... It's >> presence is enough to cause the problem. >> >> Any rule that is dependent on the existence of an instance of the >> declarative fact model where the instance is created in the RHS of >> another rule will not fire. >> >> I suspect that this is a bug that has been fixed in 5.1 because I >> have been using this technique in Drools 5.1... It's only since >> downgrading to the (supported) JBoss Rules 5.0 that I have >> experienced the problem. >> >> Does anyone know if there is a fix in the 5.0 branch? >> >> If I create a "real" Java class and upload it in a jar file to the >> Guvnor and use that in place of the declarative model then the >> problem does not happen. >> This is a workaround in the short term but I would much prefer not >> to have to do this. >> >> Chris Selwyn >> >> >> On 01/12/2010 15:14, Chris Selwyn wrote: >>> Yes the package is "SWWB2BOutgoing" but it looks as though the >>> package name simple doesn't get reported in the log file. >>> >>> I have been debugging through this thing and where I've got to so >>> far is that I am getting two (and maybe more) entries for the class >>> "SWWB2BOutgoing.QuestionValidation" in the >>> ObjectTypeConfigurationRepository. >>> So my current question is "How is this possible?" Is it maybe a >>> classloader issue? >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> On 01/12/2010 12:05, Wolfgang Laun wrote: >>>> A closer look: >>>> >>>> On 1 December 2010 11:13, Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk >>>> <mailto:chris@selwyn-family.me.uk>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I can see the facts being inserted in the log as follows >>>> [#|2010-12-01T09:19:16.723+0000|INFO|sun-appserver2.1|javax.enterprise.system.stream.out|_ThreadID=70;_ThreadName=p: >>>> thread-pool-1; w: 7;| >>>> OBJECT ASSERTED value:QuestionValidation( mandatory=true, >>>> state=Closed, >>>> question=B2B_METER_SERIAL_NUMBER, type=string ) factId: 39|#] >>>> >>>> >>>> Shouldn't the package name appear in the log as well? >>>> >>>> >>>> However, if I insert a QuestionValidation fact created in Java >>>> by using >>>> kbase.getFactType("SWWB2BOutgoing", "QuestionValidation") then >>>> the Test >>>> rule gets fired just fine. >>>> >>>> >>>> That is, apparently "SWWB2BOutgoing". >>>> >>>> -W >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> rules-users mailing list >>>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >>>> >>>> >>>> No virus found in this message. >>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> >>>> Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3290 - Release Date: 11/30/10 >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rules-users mailing list >>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> >>> Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3290 - Release Date: 11/30/10 >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> > Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3291 - Release Date: 12/01/10 >