[rules-users] controling rule execution
Edson Tirelli
tirelli at post.com
Tue Nov 4 19:01:13 EST 2008
Your understanding is correct. So activation-group does not solve your
problem.
[]s
Edson
2008/11/4 techy <techluver007 at gmail.com>
>
> Thanks Edson.
> If Parent rule does not fire, I want all of child rules to get fired. As
> per
> my understanding, If I use activation-group, Then It can only fire one
> child
> at max(which is not what I want.)
>
> Please clarify this.
>
>
> Edson Tirelli-3 wrote:
> >
> > activation-group allows you to define mutually exclusive groups of
> > rules
> > where when one fire, it cancel the others.
> >
> > []s
> > Edson
> >
> > 2008/10/31 Greg Barton <greg_barton at yahoo.com>
> >
> >> Yep, it would affect all rules that could match on those facts.
> >>
> >> You could have a control fact per child rule that could potentially
> >> match.
> >> The child rule would include an existence check for that fact in it's
> >> conditions. The parent rule would retract the fact to prevent the child
> >> rule from firing.
> >>
> >> A bit more clunky than the custom agenda filter approach, but:
> >>
> >> 1) I haven't tested the custom agenda filter thing, so I'm just guessing
> >> it'd work. (I'm pretty sure it would, though.)
> >> 2) It would be more portable across other rule engines. (If that's
> >> important to you.)
> >>
> >> --- On Fri, 10/31/08, techy <techluver007 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > From: techy <techluver007 at gmail.com>
> >> > Subject: Re: [rules-users] controling rule execution
> >> > To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > Date: Friday, October 31, 2008, 2:44 PM
> >> > Thanks Greg and Joe.
> >> > I think i should have mentioned this before.
> >> > I can also have other parent rule node in the tree
> >> > structure which tests
> >> > against same fact. Each parent rule node should only
> >> > control its child rule
> >> > nodes, but not other parent rule node and child rule node.
> >> >
> >> > If I do retract, won't it affect other parent rule
> >> > node?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Greg Barton wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > You may consider the other suggestion of retracting
> >> > the fact(s) that would
> >> > > trigger the child rule. It's the more
> >> > "natural" way of going about it.
> >> > >
> >> > > What's driving this design choice?
> >> > >
> >> > > --- On Fri, 10/31/08, techy
> >> > <techluver007 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> From: techy <techluver007 at gmail.com>
> >> > >> Subject: Re: [rules-users] controling rule
> >> > execution
> >> > >> To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > >> Date: Friday, October 31, 2008, 8:24 AM
> >> > >> Thanks Greg.
> >> > >> child rule should be reactivated if parent's
> >> > conditions
> >> > >> for some other fact
> >> > >> are false.
> >> > >> this should happen for each fact. Parent's
> >> > condition
> >> > >> should decide whether
> >> > >> child rule should be executed or not for each
> >> > fact. If
> >> > >> parent's conditions
> >> > >> are true, then don't execute child rule and
> >> > vice versa.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Greg Barton wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > A combination of higher priority parent rules
> >> > with a
> >> > >> custom agenda filter,
> >> > >> > activated when the parent rule fires, that
> >> > prevents
> >> > >> the child rule from
> >> > >> > firing.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Just a guess.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > So, after the child rule is initially
> >> > prevented from
> >> > >> firing, can it be
> >> > >> > reactivated? If so, when and under what
> >> > conditions?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > --- On Thu, 10/30/08, techy
> >> > >> <techluver007 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> From: techy
> >> > <techluver007 at gmail.com>
> >> > >> >> Subject: [rules-users] controling rule
> >> > execution
> >> > >> >> To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > >> >> Date: Thursday, October 30, 2008, 11:18
> >> > PM
> >> > >> >> Hello,
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> I would like to have the rules
> >> > parent/child
> >> > >> structure. I
> >> > >> >> don't want the
> >> > >> >> child rules to be executed when
> >> > parent's
> >> > >> conditions
> >> > >> >> are true(i.e
> >> > >> >> consequence is executed) even if
> >> > child's
> >> > >> conditions
> >> > >> >> are true. How Can I
> >> > >> >> achieve that in drools?
> >> > >> >> Please clarify.
> >> > >> >> --
> >> > >> >> View this message in context:
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> http://www.nabble.com/controling-rule-execution-tp20260028p20260028.html
> >> > >> >> Sent from the drools - user mailing list
> >> > archive
> >> > >> at
> >> > >> >> Nabble.com.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > >> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> > >> >> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> > >> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > >> >
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> --
> >> > >> View this message in context:
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> http://www.nabble.com/controling-rule-execution-tp20260028p20265921.html
> >> > >> Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive
> >> > at
> >> > >> Nabble.com.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> _______________________________________________
> >> > >> rules-users mailing list
> >> > >> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > >>
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > rules-users mailing list
> >> > > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > View this message in context:
> >> >
> >>
> http://www.nabble.com/controling-rule-execution-tp20260028p20272962.html
> >> > Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at
> >> > Nabble.com.
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Edson Tirelli
> > JBoss Drools Core Development
> > JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/controling-rule-execution-tp20260028p20332870.html
> Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20081104/1a7a0d3b/attachment.html
More information about the rules-users
mailing list