RE: [rules-users] Nested Rules

Hello, I have similar doubt. Please clarify. I have r1,r2 in rfg1 and r3,r4 in rfg2. 1. execute rg2 after rg1. this can be in rule flow. no issue. 2.I want to execute r2 for facts where r1 is true. how can I do this without using semaphore fact or r1 conditions in r2 LHS in rule flow? 3.I want to execute rfg2 rules after rg1 for facts where r1 is true and r2 is false. same question of executing rfg2 rules without using semaphore fact or r1,r2 condition? In order to achieve above flow, I can only think following way with my limited knowledge in drools. Maintain the state in the fact(using some flag as given below) for each rule execution and use it in other rules to determine whether it can be executed or not for that fact. Ex: I can have a fact in this structure for this scenario. Fact{isR1executed,isR2Executed and other fields of facts} rule r1 rule-flow-group rfg1 when r1 condition is true then isR1executed = true; do something; rule r2 rule-flow-group rfg1 when isR1executed = true, r2 condition is true then isR2executed = true; do something; rule r3 rule-flow-group rfg2 when isR1executed = true,isR2executed = false, r3 condition is true then do something rule r4 rule-flow-group rfg2 when isR1executed = true,isR2executed = false, r4 condition is true then do something Even if I use split node between rfg1 and rfg2, I have to check r1 is true and r2 is false there before going to rfg2 flow. Thanks Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote: -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Nested-Rules-tp17400813p20353543.html Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.