Hi, I'm having trouble writing an absence pattern. What I'm trying to do is detect when there is an A followed by no Bs for 3+minutes. I don't care if there is more than one A. What I'm running into is that when I try to use 'over window:time' the time within drools is the end time of the window. So this means I need to write the no Bs for 3+ min first: not( $b: B() over window:time(3m)) then try to find the A before it: $now: Long() from RuleUtilityFunctions.getSessionClockTime() $a: A( this before [3m] $now) then I should have to check to make sure that I don't have any Bs between $a's time and the start of the no B window: not( B( time >= $a.time, time <= $now)) This is not working. I think that it has something to do with my function to get the session clock time (RuleUtilityFunctions.getSessionClockTime()) and how things get evaluated within the Rete engine. Because it does not seem like $now is getting re-evaluated on future calls that pass the $b condition. If I replace $now with the call to getSessionClockTime() everything just seems to get weird. I've tried to write the rule forward too. Look for A followed by no B but that does not seem to work because A is matched at the current time and the rule triggers because there is no B because the future B data has not be inserted into working memory yet. What is the right way to write this rule? Is there a way to get the start and end time of the time window that met the over window:time() condition? Thank you, Wendy -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Absence-Pattern-question-tp3140377p3140... 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

Won't that just make the rule activate after 3 minutes?

rule AnoB when $a: A( status == "waiting for B" ) not B( this after [3m] $a )

then modify( $a ){ setStatus( "no B within 3m after me" ) } end Is this any good? Also "untested" ;)

2011/7/5 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; > Try a rule with a timer: > > rule AnoB > timer( int: 3m ) > when > $a: A( status == "waiting for B" ) > not B( this after $a ) > then > modify( $a ){ setStatus( "no B within 3m after me" ) } > end > > Untested. > -W > > > > On 5 July 2011 13:00, wendy <w.mungovan(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi, >> I'm having trouble writing an absence pattern. What I'm trying to do is >> detect when there is an A followed by no Bs for 3+minutes. I don't care >> if >> there is more than one A. What I'm running into is that when I try to >> use >> 'over window:time' the time within drools is the end time of the window. >> So >> this means I need to write the no Bs for 3+ min first: >> >> not( $b: B() over window:time(3m)) >> >> then try to find the A before it: >> >> $now: Long() from RuleUtilityFunctions.getSessionClockTime() >> $a: A( this before [3m] $now) >> >> then I should have to check to make sure that I don't have any Bs between >> $a's time and the start of the no B window: >> >> not( B( time >= $a.time, >> time <= $now)) >> >> This is not working. I think that it has something to do with my >> function >> to get the session clock time >> (RuleUtilityFunctions.getSessionClockTime()) >> and how things get evaluated within the Rete engine. Because it does not >> seem like $now is getting re-evaluated on future calls that pass the $b >> condition. If I replace $now with the call to getSessionClockTime() >> everything just seems to get weird. >> >> I've tried to write the rule forward too. Look for A followed by no B >> but >> that does not seem to work because A is matched at the current time and >> the >> rule triggers because there is no B because the future B data has not be >> inserted into working memory yet. >> >> What is the right way to write this rule? Is there a way to get the >> start >> and end time of the time window that met the over window:time() >> condition? >> >> Thank you, >> Wendy >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Absence-Pattern-question-tp3140377p3140... >> 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 >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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

Thanks, This did it: rule "AnoB" timer(int: 3m) when $a: A() not($b: B( this after[-1ms] $a)) then .... I needed to add [-1ms] so it would not match things with A and B at the same exact time.

-- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Absence-Pattern-question-tp3140377p3140... 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