[rules-users] QA features in BRMS

[Esteban Aliverti]

This is because the scenario you are describing is not always an
error/warning. Maybe for you it is an error, but for other people could be a
typical situation. I.e: if you have audit rules.

Best Regards,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com


2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat at gmail.com>

> Yes, I tried QA analysis.  But it only can find out the problems of the
> individual rules like what you said.  I tried to develop two rules with
> sames conditions but different consequences and do the QA analysis, it
> cannot detect it unfortunately.  :(
>
>
>
>
> 2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti at gmail.com>
>
> I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you try it? As
>> far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing gaps, etc.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>
>> Esteban Aliverti
>> - Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
>>
>> The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would require
>>> heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
>>>    X($f: foo)
>>>    Y(bar == $f)
>>> as compared to
>>>    Y($b: bar)
>>>    X(foo == $b)
>>>
>>> And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
>>>
>>> And even your "straightforward" case would require the consideration of
>>> rule attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in
>>> different agenda groups, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> -W
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat at gmail.com>:
>>> > The conflict is like :
>>> >
>>> > E.g.
>>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
>>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
>>> >
>>> > Can the BRMS detect this?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>>> wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Please define "conflict".
>>> >> -W
>>> >>
>>> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung at redhat.com>:
>>> >> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created
>>> rules
>>> >> > in
>>> >> > the BRMS 5.1.  Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>>> wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features" and
>>> >> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
>>> >> >> -W
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat at gmail.com>:
>>> >> >> > Hi,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
>>> >> >> > checks?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Thanks
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> > 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
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Benson Fung
>>> >> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
>>> >> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan
>>> Avenue,
>>> >> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell :
>>> 852-98369898
>>> >> > ||
>>> >> > benson.fung at redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.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
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20101230/14d51c40/attachment.html