Wolfgang,
thank you so much for your remarks! It’s really
interesting:
-
I tried the approach to
update the parent whenever a child is modified before – without any
success
-
Now I changed my rule to your
(definitely much better) suggestion – and it works!
So despite of the fact that I’m really happy to have this
one solved I would really be interested in what the problem with the forall is.
Is it possible that a forall statement creates some kind of copy
or “summary” of the facts to be evaluated and is checked only once?
Like an eval statement?
Anyways – thank you so much for your help!
Best regards
Georg
Von: rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] Im Auftrag von Wolfgang
Laun
Gesendet: Montag, 2. August 2010 12:15
An: Rules Users List
Betreff: Re: [rules-users] Drools + EMF + CDO
Several remarks:
(1) Make sure that a parent is asserted after all of its children. Otherwise
initial evaluation will not comprise the entire children's list.
(2) After changing a child's state, update the parent.
(3) The rule as you have it now is somewhat circumstantial. A simpler approach
would be
rule NoUpChild
when
$p : Device( $children : eContents,
eContents.size
> 0 )
not( Device( state == "UP" ) from $children )
then
System.out.println( $p.getId() + ": no child up"
);
end
(4) If you have a "parent" field, this could even be written:
rule NoUpChild
when
$p : Device( children.size > 0 )
not( Device( parent == $p, state == "UP" ) )
then
System.out.println( $p.getId() + ": no child up"
);
end
-W
2010/8/2 Georg Maier <Georg.Maier@cjt.de>
Hi,
I’m trying to figure out an issue for three days now and
I’m getting kind of desperate, so I hope someone can help.
I’m using Drools in combination with an EMF model which is
modeling a computer network. On init, I read the whole structure of the model
and insert all elements into the working memory. Some of the entities share the
super class “Device” which has an attribute “state”.
Now I’m having the following rule to change an attribute of
one of the model entities:
rule "Set
received status to model"
when
$event : SomeEvent (
$hostname : hostname,
$hoststate : hoststate,
$timestamp : timestamp
)
$device : Device (
name == $hostname
)
then
modify($device) {
setState($hoststate);
}
db.commit(false);
retract($event);
System.err.println("Set status of " + $device + "
to " + $hoststate);
end
… which works perfectly fine. Anyway, what I want to do in
this test case is to react whenever all child devices of a mutual parent
device (e.g. hosts on one switch) are no longer reachable. I thought of a
rule like the following:
rule "Parent
Children Test"
when
$parent : Device (
$children : eContents,
eContents.size > 0
)
forall (
$child : Device (
state
== "DOWN"
) from $children
)
then
…
end
… which by the way worked perfectly fine as long as I was not
using objects from a model. My first idea was that for some strange reason the
object might get copied so that I actually would have two different references
after modifying it, but this is not the case. When I initialize the rule base
with the circumstances that the second rule would fire, it really does. It just
seems as it would not being evaluated after changing the attribute, but this is
not the case either! So all I can think of is some strange caching, maybe in
combination with the forall statement?
Maybe someone has some experience when using Drools with EMF + CDO and
experienced as similar issue?
Any help would be very very very much appreciated!
Thanks in advance
Georg
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users