[jboss-jira] [JBoss JIRA] Resolved: (JBRULES-387) Using exists together with facts of the same type can break auto-retraction of logically asserted objects

[Edson Tirelli (JIRA)]

     [ http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-387?page=all ]

Edson Tirelli resolved JBRULES-387.
-----------------------------------

    Fix Version/s: 3.0.4
       Resolution: Done

Problem fixed and commited in revision #5823 (3.0.x branch):

=============
JBRULES-387:

  * Fixing NOT and JOIN node problems on modify tuple
  * Adding test case

$ svn commit 
Sending        drools-compiler/src/test/java/org/drools/Cheese.java
Sending        drools-compiler/src/test/java/org/drools/integrationtests/IntegrationCases.java
Adding         drools-compiler/src/test/resources/org/drools/integrationtests/test_LogicalAssertionWithExists.drl
Sending        drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/reteoo/JoinNode.java
Sending        drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/reteoo/NotNode.java
Sending        drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/reteoo/TerminalNode.java
Transmitting file data ......
Committed revision 5823.
==============

Fixed in trunk in revision #5824:

==============
$ svn commit 
Sending        drools-compiler/src/test/java/org/drools/Cheese.java
Sending        drools-compiler/src/test/java/org/drools/integrationtests/IntegrationCases.java
Adding         drools-compiler/src/test/resources/org/drools/integrationtests/test_LogicalAssertionWithExists.drl
Sending        drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/reteoo/JoinNode.java
Sending        drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/reteoo/TerminalNode.java
Transmitting file data ....
Committed revision 5824.
==============

Please, let me know if you find any other problem. 

Also, please note that by definition, logical asserts in JBRules are equals() based, so if one does not implement equals()/hashcode() methods in logically asserted classes, there is a possibility that multiple objects will be asserted into memory for a single rule.

Edson

> Using exists together with facts of the same type can break auto-retraction of logically asserted objects
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JBRULES-387
>                 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-387
>             Project: JBoss Rules
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Everyone can see) 
>          Components: Reteoo
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.3
>         Environment: Windows XP, java 1.5
>            Reporter: Geoffrey De Smet
>         Assigned To: Edson Tirelli
>             Fix For: 3.0.4
>
>         Attachments: JBRULES-387-testcase-trunk.patch, JBRULES-387.zip, screenshot-1.jpg
>
>
> I assert 3 Lesson objects in my memory.
> I got 1 rule, which creates logically asserted HardConstraint objects.
> In some cases (not always), those logically asserted objects aren't retracted when they should be, which leads to HardContaints just adding more and more. They aren't logically retracted as they should be when:
> - exists is combined with fact selections of the same class
> - the modified object trigged the rule by the exists part, not by the the fact selection part
> I 'll attach a maven 2 configured proof of concept to repreduce it:
> mvn install eclipse:eclipse idea:idea
> Run net.sf.tabudrool.app.TabudroolApp
> Click "Load unsolvedSchedule2.xml" (the second button on the left)
> Notice the HardConstraint = 2 at the bottom
> Click "Move lesson"
> Move "[net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 0: teacher0 + group0" to timeslot 1.
> Notice that HardConstraint = 3 instead 1 at the bottom,
> because - as you can see in the log - the previous HardConstraint objects didn't get retracted.
> Here's the drl:
> rule teacherCanOnlyTeachOneGroupAtATime
>   when
>     $lesson : Lesson($id : id, $teacher : teacher, $timeslot : timeslot)
>     exists Lesson(id > $id, teacher == $teacher, timeslot == $timeslot)
>   then
>     System.out.println("  teacherCanOnlyTeachOneGroupAtATime: " + $lesson);
>     assertLogical(new HardConstraint(1));
> end
> Here's a log:
>   teacherCanOnlyTeachOneGroupAtATime: [net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 0: teacher0 + group0
>   teacherCanOnlyTeachOneGroupAtATime: [net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-0] 0: teacher0 + group0
> [ObjectAsserted: handle=[fid:9:9]; object=net.sf.tabudrool.domain.HardConstraint at 1f42731]
> [ObjectAsserted: handle=[fid:10:10]; object=net.sf.tabudrool.domain.HardConstraint at 53abbb]
> 2006-08-03 19:24:35,796 [AWT-EventQueue-0] INFO  net.sf.tabudrool.swingui.WorkflowFrame$MoveAction.actionPerformed(WorkflowFrame.java:201)
>   Moving [[net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 0: teacher0 + group0] to [1]
> [ObjectModified: handle=[fid:7:11]; old_object=[net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 1: teacher0 + group0; new_object=[net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 1: teacher0 + group0]
>   teacherCanOnlyTeachOneGroupAtATime: [net.sf.tabudrool.domain.Lesson-1] 1: teacher0 + group0
> [ObjectAsserted: handle=[fid:11:12]; object=net.sf.tabudrool.domain.HardConstraint at 1c8b884]
> As you can see: net.sf.tabudrool.domain.HardConstraint at 1f42731 and net.sf.tabudrool.domain.HardConstraint at 53abbb weren't retracted (at least one should be).
> Earlier this week I posted a dud jira issue, as far as I can tell from discussing on irc (with conan), this looks like a genuine issue...

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira