The image is not complete, so I can not see the conditions and actions you are using. If you insert a fact that matches all the rules, then all of them are going to be executed in certain order determined by the resolution strategy algorithm you mentioned. Changing the resolution strategy algorithm is no a so common task. It is preferable to write the rules in a way they don't have inconsistencies. Best Regards, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Esteban Aliverti - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:17 AM, tanug <tanu.gupta(a)rupeelog.com&gt; wrote:

Assuming the row number indicates the sequence of your rules add the salience attribute and have it "use reverse row numbers". Then add an additional constraint that checks that "fee" has not been set; e.g. "navclass( fees > -1 )" or "navclass( hasFeeBeenSet == false )" As you have it now, all rules that match the given data will execute, so in your example "txntype==buy" matches rule 6 too. You cannot control the order rules' RHS execute with the same salience value (default is 0). If you only add salience but not the additional check that "fee" has not been set you will be able to control the order the rules' RHS execute but not prevent later rules from firing after the earlier ones. With kind regards, Mike On 28 August 2012 10:38, tanug <tanu.gupta(a)rupeelog.com&gt; wrote:

The learning is : for your case, where all your row in your table have an implicit priority and business logic, yes, don't hope that drools engine will guess that by itself. As far i understand, you expect the rules to trigger from top to bottom (or most specific to less), and stop when a rule has fired. Your problem is that you have a lot of rules with shared conditions which have different (and conflicting) actions. Using "specificity" strategy is a good idea (never tried, but it looks great), but that won't prevent other (less "specific") rules to fired after the first specific rules has fired. In addition to "specific" strategy, you have to add a condition to test if your "fees" field is set or not. If you add a common column (you can hide it under guvnor) that test "fees == null", then the first rule exec (so the most specific one) will set this field and prevent other rules to fire. So, please let drools manage the rules firing, but tune your rules/facts to fit your specific business logic, under drools (or any other expert-system) constraints. ----- Mail original ----- De: "tanug" <tanu.gupta(a)rupeelog.com&gt; À: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org Envoyé: Mardi 28 Août 2012 13:44:25 Objet: Re: [rules-users] Understanding Rules Firing Sequence Thanks everyone for your suggestions. so, basically, the learning is : I should not leave rule firing to Drools, and have a proper priority and exit condition. And, I cannot rely on "specificity" for rule selection (i was so hoping it would work) Thanks again, best regards Tanu -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Understanding-Rules-Firing-Sequence-tp4... 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