Unfortunately, we're using the 3.0 version, so I don't think we can use the repository. That may be necessary with a future version, when we allow users to make their own rules. Right now, we can be sure that the only rules changes are coming from developers. Our challenge is that the way we push out a change to the rules is with a central process which does not have access to the working memory (nor should it), it merely compiles the rules and places them in a central location (a database table). The rules are actually being executed by a series of drones. Those drones pull the serialized copy of the rules from the common area before they execute. Since we currently do not allow users to make their own rules, we can safely assume that no changes are introduced that might invalidate the working memories. So, we haven't tried that, but I'm not sure that we would be able to. Would it be safer to use the getGlobals() and getObjects() methods to serialize that data, instead of serializing the workingMemory itself? (and then when we start back up, deserialize the rules, create a new working memory, and setGlobal() and assertObject() all of our serialized data). ... or am I missing something even simpler? Thanks once again for your very speedy response! Daniel, I think what you are trying to achieve requires some careful planning. If you use the repository, you have a versioned rule base that make sure you don't lose your working memory. Although, without the repo, only thing I can think of is you making sure your application always loads the wm into memory, perform the rules replacement (adding/removing rules), so the working memory gets properly updated, and then serializes your wm back to the database.... did you tried that? []s Edson 2007/6/14, Daniel E Chapman <dechapma(a)us.ibm.com&gt;: and Later, will were do, rules to and version be time -- Edson Tirelli Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer Office: +55 11 3529-6000 Mobile: +55 11 9287-5646 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com