I have come across a problem of unexpected cancels on activations when using property reactive facts. The problem occurs if two or more rules have the same criteria. I have uploaded all the files and a unit test to show this using a very simple bare bones example: pom.xml <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/pom.xml> log4j.properties <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/log4j.properties> modify-test.drl <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/modify-test.drl> SampleBean.java <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/SampleBean.java> RuleRunner.java <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/RuleRunner.java> RulesLogger.java <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/RulesLogger.java> ModifyTest.java <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4021204/ModifyTest.java> Running ModifyTest.java produces the following logs: 0 [main] DEBUG com.demo.rules.session.RulesLogger - Activation created calculate y 1 [main] DEBUG com.demo.rules.session.RulesLogger - Activation created calculate x 2 [main] DEBUG com.demo.rules.session.RulesLogger - Before Activation fired calculate x 4 [main] DEBUG com.demo.rules.session.RulesLogger - Activation cancelled calculate y 6 [main] DEBUG com.demo.rules.session.RulesLogger - After Activation fired [Activation rule=calculate x, act#=1, salience=0, tuple=[fact 0:2:42753698:30752:3:DEFAULT:SampleBean [x=10, y=null, id=1]] ] The activations have been created as expected but an activation on a rule is cancelled unexpectedily as indicated by log statement 4. Why is this? If all the rules have a different criteria then all works fine. If i dont use property reactive facts then it works. It looks like this is a bug, can someone confirm this ? We have some edge case scenarios in our rules where it is possible for some rules to end up with the same criteria. We dont want to force the business analysts to have to merge the rules as we have a very large number of rules, and it will be very hard for them to track the criteria for each rule. If it is not a bug can someone please provide the rational reason why it is sensible to have the activation cancelled. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/same-criteria-across-multiple-rules-can... 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

Hi , I re ran the test using drools 5.4.0 too, same problem. In the majority of our cases Property Reactive Facts work really well. Not using this feature is not really an option that we would like to take as we would have to rewrite the rules. We have thousands of rules. Can you please let me know the process for getting this bug fixed in drools?

I would like to propagate this issue to the engineering team and for them to fix the bug in the next release. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/same-criteria-across-multiple-rules-can... 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