3:14 a.m.
In our project we have been experiencing a large number of intermittent unit test failures
when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).
After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors, experimenting and
generally scratching our head trying to work out what is wrong, we have noticed that
sometimes (but very intermittently) activations are firing in the wrong order.
In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience 70. Whilst
debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B having some additional
constraints on the end.
Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions occurring:
BEFORE_FIRED rule X
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B
AFTER_FIRED rule X
... (no references to either rule/activation)
BEFORE_FIRED Rule B
CANCELLED Rule A
AFTER_FIRED Rule B
How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?
Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this?
We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit test failures,
we've not had chance to examine whether this is the same pattern or just a different
logic issue.
Please help,
Thomas
________________________________
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify the postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from
your system as well as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be
monitored by NDS for employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please
do not print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United
Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603
8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
5:05 a.m.
There used to be a subtle bug in the PriorityHeapQueue containing the
activations.
See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3044
-W
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells(a)nds.com>
In our project we have been experiencing a large number of
intermittent
unit test failures when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).****
After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors,
experimenting and generally scratching our head trying to work out what is
wrong, we have noticed that sometimes (but very intermittently) activations
are firing in the wrong order.****
** **
In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience
70. Whilst debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B
having some additional constraints on the end. ****
Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions
occurring:****
BEFORE_FIRED rule X****
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A****
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B****
AFTER_FIRED rule X****
** **
… (no references to either rule/activation)****
** **
BEFORE_FIRED Rule B****
CANCELLED Rule A****
AFTER_FIRED Rule B****
** **
How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?****
Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this? ****
We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit
test failures, we’ve not had chance to examine whether this is the same
pattern or just a different logic issue.****
** **
Please help,****
** **
Thomas****
** **
** **
------------------------------
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you
have received this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies.
The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not
print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18
4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered
no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
5:41 a.m.
Ouch looks like we and anybody on 5.1.1 needs to desperately update then.
Though I am rather concerned by this issue https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3211
"Rules fires on incorrect condition" - has this been looked at/is the issue
correct as a rules engine which fires random rules when it shouldn't would be
problematic!
Thomas
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Wolfgang Laun
Sent: 18 October 2011 11:05
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Help! Activations firing out of salience order
There used to be a subtle bug in the PriorityHeapQueue containing the activations.
See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3044
-W
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells@nds.com<mailto:TSwindells@nds.com>>
In our project we have been experiencing a large number of intermittent unit test failures
when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).
After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors, experimenting and
generally scratching our head trying to work out what is wrong, we have noticed that
sometimes (but very intermittently) activations are firing in the wrong order.
In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience 70. Whilst
debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B having some additional
constraints on the end.
Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions occurring:
BEFORE_FIRED rule X
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B
AFTER_FIRED rule X
... (no references to either rule/activation)
BEFORE_FIRED Rule B
CANCELLED Rule A
AFTER_FIRED Rule B
How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?
Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this?
We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit test failures,
we've not had chance to examine whether this is the same pattern or just a different
logic issue.
Please help,
Thomas
________________________________
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster@nds.com<mailto:postmaster@nds.com> and delete it from your system as well
as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not print this
e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United
Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603
8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
7:23 p.m.
This was a duplicate of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3111 that
was fixed last week. It will be released in 5.3.0.final.
Edson
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells(a)nds.com>
Ouch looks like we and anybody on 5.1.1 needs to desperately update
then.*
***
Though I am rather concerned by this issue
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3211 “Rules fires on incorrect
condition” – has this been looked at/is the issue correct as a rules engine
which fires random rules when it shouldn’t would be problematic!****
** **
Thomas****
** **
*From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Wolfgang Laun
*Sent:* 18 October 2011 11:05
*To:* Rules Users List
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Help! Activations firing out of salience
order****
** **
There used to be a subtle bug in the PriorityHeapQueue containing the
activations.
See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3044
-W****
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells(a)nds.com>****
In our project we have been experiencing a large number of intermittent
unit test failures when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).****
After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors,
experimenting and generally scratching our head trying to work out what is
wrong, we have noticed that sometimes (but very intermittently) activations
are firing in the wrong order.****
****
In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience
70. Whilst debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B
having some additional constraints on the end. ****
Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions
occurring:****
BEFORE_FIRED rule X****
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A****
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B****
AFTER_FIRED rule X****
****
… (no references to either rule/activation)****
****
BEFORE_FIRED Rule B****
CANCELLED Rule A****
AFTER_FIRED Rule B****
****
How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?****
Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this? ****
We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit
test failures, we’ve not had chance to examine whether this is the same
pattern or just a different logic issue.****
****
Please help,****
****
Thomas****
****
****
** **
------------------------------
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you
have received this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies.
The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not
print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18
4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered
no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
****
_______________________________________________
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
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
2:02 a.m.
That's a relief.
Any news as to when final will be released?
Thanks,
Thomas
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: 19 October 2011 01:23
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Help! Activations firing out of salience order
This was a duplicate of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3111 that was fixed
last week. It will be released in 5.3.0.final.
Edson
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells@nds.com<mailto:TSwindells@nds.com>>
Ouch looks like we and anybody on 5.1.1 needs to desperately update then.
Though I am rather concerned by this issue https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3211
"Rules fires on incorrect condition" - has this been looked at/is the issue
correct as a rules engine which fires random rules when it shouldn't would be
problematic!
Thomas
From:
rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org>]
On Behalf Of Wolfgang Laun
Sent: 18 October 2011 11:05
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Help! Activations firing out of salience order
There used to be a subtle bug in the PriorityHeapQueue containing the activations.
See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3044
-W
2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells@nds.com<mailto:TSwindells@nds.com>>
In our project we have been experiencing a large number of intermittent unit test failures
when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).
After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors, experimenting and
generally scratching our head trying to work out what is wrong, we have noticed that
sometimes (but very intermittently) activations are firing in the wrong order.
In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience 70. Whilst
debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B having some additional
constraints on the end.
Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions occurring:
BEFORE_FIRED rule X
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A
CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B
AFTER_FIRED rule X
... (no references to either rule/activation)
BEFORE_FIRED Rule B
CANCELLED Rule A
AFTER_FIRED Rule B
How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?
Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this?
We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit test failures,
we've not had chance to examine whether this is the same pattern or just a different
logic issue.
Please help,
Thomas
________________________________
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster@nds.com<mailto:postmaster@nds.com> and delete it from your system as well
as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not print this
e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United
Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603
8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com<http://www.jboss.com>
1:46 p.m.
I had to upgrade to 5.2 to get away from the same salience bug. So far 5.2
has been very good to us other than the outrageous amount of memory it takes
to load up a large rule base (which you can partially get around using the
latest mvel jar).
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Help-Activations-firing-out...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
4814
days inactive
4815
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
darktyco -
Edson Tirelli -
Swindells, Thomas -
Wolfgang Laun