Re: [rules-users] WorkflowProcessInstance in DRL

Hello, I am having some problems using WorkflowProcessInstance in rules. I have searched and not been able to find an answer to my question. I am attempting to use rule flows to define business processes and rules both in ruleflow groups to be executed on demand of the process and outside of a ruleflow group for "global" rules and to potentially direct the ruleflow(/process) is to run. Many of these processes are comprised of subprocesses which I have been using sub flows to model. I have used flow variables to store some minimal information about the process such as what the process ID corresponds to in the existing data model I am working with. My intent was so that I could use a single rule flow group in many rule flows to extract information from the database for the corresponding process ID in the working memory (this extraction would also depend on other facts in the working memory). I've inserted the WorkflowProcessInstance by using an action node in the "parent" process and it seems to work fine. My problem arises when I am then in a "child" process/subflow and try to invoke this single rule flow group with a different process ID in the flow variable, there are no activations. I think this happens because the WorkflowProcessInstance has not been updated in working memory so it will not know that there might be a new process ID stored in the flow variable (it has the same name in both flows as it is meant to represent the same thing). If I insert the WorkflowProcessInstance again in the sub flow I get activations in the rule flow group for facts in the working memory associated with both the parent and child sub flow which almost makes sense except for this: "We have added special logic to make sure that a variable processInstance of type WorkflowProcessInstance will only match to the current process instance and not to other process instances in the Working Memory." It seems that it is matching both instances of WorkflowProcessInstance. I use the convention of starting variable names from the LHS of a rule with a $ but I have tested it without and I get the same result. Is this expected behaviour? An alternative I've been trying to figure out is how to update the WorkflowProcessInstance in working memory in the child process. Since it is actually a different object I'm unsure how to do this. Should I retract all instances and then insert the current? Is there a way to do this more cleanly than looking through all working memory objects and checking their type in an action node? Finally (or perhaps firstly...), am I going about this correctly? Cheers, Gareth