Hi Sebastian,
As per your last email, your use case sounds very similar to my use case
scenario and I would second the suggestion from Wolfgang, switch from
realtime to pseudoclock may help.
I think the thread "[rules-users] Question about Fusion pseudoclock" in the
mailing list could help, and in my use case scenario I found the following
code example *extremely* valuable because I do mostly same
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm-contributed-experiments/blob/mas...
I hope this helps you too.
This approach would solve for "network delay issue" but will induce another
problem, in case "network" never restores or delay gets outrageous.
Ciao
MM
On 4 Jun 2014 12:00, "SebastianStehle" <mail2stehle(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I see that the update process is not optimal, but can you tell me if
my
simple example should work or not?
We get measurements from sensors. Because of network delay and other
intermediate processes the timestamp of the measurements can be some
seconds
behind the time of the insert. In this case the rules with after would not
work correctly as well.
I am new to drools, so there is a high chance that I make some mistakes.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Fusion-Insert-Events-with-timestamp-in-...
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