[rules-users] Planner 5.3.Final - "presumedScore is corrupted" when using "update" on the rules working memory => shadow proxies problems?
Patrik Dufresne
ikus060 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 6 20:18:59 EST 2011
I'm still experimenting with Drools Planner and I also have the exact same
issue :
java.lang.IllegalStateException: The presumedScore (0hard/-1soft) is
corrupted because it is not the realScore (0hard/0soft).
Presumed workingMemory:
Score rule (soft-ReduceNullAssignment) has count (1) and weight total (1).
Real workingMemory:
at
org.drools.planner.core.solution.director.DefaultSolutionDirector.assertWorkingScore(DefaultSolutionDirector.java:157)
at
org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolverScope.assertWorkingScore(DefaultSolverScope.java:105)
at
org.drools.planner.core.phase.AbstractSolverPhaseScope.assertWorkingScore(AbstractSolverPhaseScope.java:132)
at
org.drools.planner.core.constructionheuristic.greedyFit.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase.solve(DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase.java:69)
at
org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.runSolverPhases(DefaultSolver.java:166)
at
org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.solve(DefaultSolver.java:138)
...
I've read this (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3301), but it
didn't help :
- I'm using IntConstraintOccurrence
- I double check the soft constraint named "soft-ReduceNullAssignment"
-- it's include all the cause.
- I'm using Drools 5.3
After more digging, I think something is missing in
DefaultSolutionDirector.java:153. The facts are added, but the
planningEntity are not added. So when the score calculation is running,
there is two different result. I'v place a breakpoint
at DefaultSolutionDirector.java:157 and looking
in tmpWorkingMemory->defaultEntryPoint->objectStore->identifyMap->table, I
don't see the planningEntity.
Here is the my rule :
rule "soft-ReduceNullAssignment"
when
$planif : PlanifEventAssignment( employee == null )
then
insertLogical(new
IntConstraintOccurrence("soft-ReduceNullAssignment",
ConstraintType.NEGATIVE_SOFT,
1,
$planif));
end
Thanks
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Geoffrey De Smet
<ge0ffrey.spam at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> Op 06-12-11 05:38, guyramirez schreef:
> > Still the same issue, starting with the construction heuristic phase.
> Please
> > let me know if you need more explanations in what I am trying to do.
> >
> > Here is the error. Please note that there is only one planning entity
> > (ShiftAssignment) object instance in this test.
> >
> > Total Staffing required: 8
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,627 [main] INFO Solver started: time spend (0),
> score
> > (null), new best score (null), random seed (0).
> > ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10 [st: 100, dur: 3]
> > ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10 [st: 100, dur: 2]
> > ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10 [st: 100, dur: 4]
> > ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10 [st: 100, dur: 1]
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Building ConstraintOccurrence
> summary
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 101, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, [ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10
> [st:
> > 100, dur: 1]]]=1)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 103, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, []]=2)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 102, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, []]=2)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 100, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, [ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10
> [st:
> > 100, dur: 1], ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10 [st: 100, dur: 1]]]=0)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Building ConstraintOccurrence
> summary
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 101, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, []]=2)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 103, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, []]=2)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 100, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, [ShiftAssignment: emp. id: 10
> [st:
> > 100, dur: 1]]]=1)
> > 2011-12-05 22:21:49,678 [main] TRACE Adding ConstraintOccurrence
> > (intervalRequirementCovered/NEGATIVE_HARD:[IntervalRequirement: interval:
> > 102, position id: 1, staffingRequired: 2, []]=2)
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalStateException: The
> > presumedScore (-5hard/-1soft) is corrupted because it is not the
> realScore
> > (-7hard/-1soft).
> > Presumed workingMemory:
> > Score rule (intervalRequirementCovered) has count (4) and weight total
> > (5).
> > Real workingMemory:
> > Score rule (intervalRequirementCovered) has count (4) and weight total
> > (7).
> So the score rule intervalRequirementCovered is to blame.
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.solution.director.DefaultSolutionDirector.assertWorkingScore(DefaultSolutionDirector.java:157)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolverScope.assertWorkingScore(DefaultSolverScope.java:105)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.phase.AbstractSolverPhaseScope.assertWorkingScore(AbstractSolverPhaseScope.java:132)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.constructionheuristic.greedyFit.decider.DefaultGreedyDecider.decideNextStep(DefaultGreedyDecider.java:65)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.constructionheuristic.greedyFit.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase.solve(DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase.java:62)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.runSolverPhases(DefaultSolver.java:166)
> > at
> >
> org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.solve(DefaultSolver.java:138)
> > at
> com.lfsoscience.planner.LfsoPlannerMain.execute(LfsoPlannerMain.java:36)
> > at
> com.lfsoscience.planner.LfsoPlannerMain.main(LfsoPlannerMain.java:27)
> >
> >
> >
> > The drl:
> > rule "intervalRequirementCovered"
> Let's take a look
> > when
> > $intervalReq : IntervalRequirement($interval : interval,
> $position :
> > position, $staffingRequired : staffingRequired)
> > $matchingShiftAssignments : ArrayList( size<= $staffingRequired
> )
> >
> from collect ( ShiftAssignment(shiftStartTime<= $interval,
> > shiftEndTime> $interval, position == $position) )
> I never used "from collect" in my examples yet.
> You probably stumbled upon a "statefull memory corruption bug" in drools.
>
> First try this alternative way:
>
> $intervalReq : IntervalRequirement($interval : interval,
> $position : position, $staffingRequired : staffingRequired)
> $matchingShiftAssignmentSize : Number(intValue <=
> $staffingRequired) from accumulate(
> $x : ShiftAssignment(shiftStartTime <= $interval,
> shiftEndTime > $interval, position == $position),
> count($x)
> )
>
> If that works, file a ticket in issues.jboss.org for the project JBRULES
> about "statefull working memory corruption by using collect"
> and include that rule and - if possible - testdata how to reproduce it.
> > then
> > #actions
> > insertLogical(new
> IntConstraintOccurrence("intervalRequirementCovered",
> > ConstraintType.NEGATIVE_HARD,
> > $staffingRequired -
> $matchingShiftAssignments.size(),
> > $intervalReq,
> $matchingShiftAssignments));
> > end
> > rule "hardConstraintsBroken"
> > salience -1 // Do the other rules first (optional, for
> performance)
> > when
> > $hardTotal : Number() from accumulate(
> > IntConstraintOccurrence(constraintType ==
> > ConstraintType.NEGATIVE_HARD, $weight : weight), sum($weight)
> > )
> > then
> > scoreCalculator.setHardConstraintsBroken($hardTotal.intValue());
> > end
> > rule "softConstraintsBroken"
> > when
> > eval(true)
> > then
> > scoreCalculator.setSoftConstraintsBroken(1);
> > end
> >
> >
> >
> > The Planning Entity:
> >
> > @PlanningEntity
> > public class ShiftAssignment implements Cloneable {
> > private Employee employee;
> > private int day;
> > private Position position;
> > private TimeLengthPair timeLengthPair = null;
> > // Immutable object. Does not need to be cloned when calling clone
> > private List<TimeLengthPair> possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairList;
> > private Set<TimeLengthPair> possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairSet;
> >
> >
> > public ShiftAssignment(Employee employee, int day, Position
> position,
> > Set<TimeLengthPair> shiftStartTimeLengthPairs) {
> > this.employee = employee;
> > this.day = day;
> > this.position = position;
> > this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairSet = new
> > HashSet<TimeLengthPair>(shiftStartTimeLengthPairs);
> > }
> >
> > public int getShiftStartTime() {
> > return this.timeLengthPair != null ?
> this.timeLengthPair.getStartTime() :
> > -1;
> > }
> >
> > public int getShiftEndTime() {
> > return this.timeLengthPair != null ?
> this.timeLengthPair.getStartTime() +
> > this.timeLengthPair.getLength() : -1;
> > }
> >
> > public void setShiftStartTimeLengthPair(TimeLengthPair
> timeLengthPair) {
> > this.timeLengthPair = timeLengthPair;
> > System.out.println(this);
> > }
> looks good
> >
> > public void addPossibleShiftStartTimeLengthPair(TimeLengthPair
> > timeLengthPair) {
> >
> this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairSet.add(timeLengthPair);
> > // Clear the list since the Set has changed. The list will
> be recreated
> > from the set when needed (see getPossibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairs())
> > this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairList = null;
> > }
> this isn't called during planning I presume?
> > @PlanningVariable
> > @ValueRangeFromPlanningEntityProperty(propertyName =
> > "possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairs")
> > public TimeLengthPair getShiftStartTimeLengthPair() {
> > return this.timeLengthPair;
> > }
> looks good
> > public List<TimeLengthPair>
> getPossibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairs() {
> > if (this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairList == null) {
> > this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairList = new
> > ArrayList<TimeLengthPair>(this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairSet);
> > }
> > return this.possibleShiftStartTimeLengthPairList;
> > }
> >
> > public Employee getEmployee() {
> > return this.employee;
> > }
> >
> > public int getDay() {
> > return this.day;
> > }
> >
> > public Position getPosition() {
> > return this.position;
> > }
> >
> > public boolean solutionEquals(Object o) {
> > if (this == o) {
> > return true;
> > } else if (o instanceof ShiftAssignment) {
> > ShiftAssignment other = (ShiftAssignment) o;
> > return new EqualsBuilder()
> > .append(this.employee, other.employee)
> > .append(this.position, other.position)
> > .append(this.timeLengthPair, other.timeLengthPair)
> > .isEquals();
> > } else {
> > return false;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > public int solutionHashCode() {
> > HashCodeBuilder hashCodeBuilder = new HashCodeBuilder();
> > hashCodeBuilder.append(getClass())
> > .append(this.employee)
> > .append(this.position)
> > .append(this.timeLengthPair);
> > return hashCodeBuilder.toHashCode();
> > }
> >
> > @Override
> > public Object clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException {
> > return super.clone();
> > }
> >
> > @Override
> > public String toString() {
> > StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
> > sb.append("ShiftAssignment: ")
> > .append("emp. id: ").append(this.employee.getId())
> > .append(" ")
> > .append(this.timeLengthPair != null ?
> this.timeLengthPair.toString() :
> > "Not Initialized");
> > return sb.toString();
> > }
> >
> > @Override
> > public int hashCode() {
> > return solutionHashCode();
> > // return super.hashCode();
> > }
> >
> > @Override
> > public boolean equals(Object obj) {
> > return solutionEquals(obj);
> > // return super.equals(obj);
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Planner-5-3-Final-presumedScore-is-corrupted-when-using-update-on-the-rules-working-memory-tp3546932p3563446.html
> > Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
>
> --
> With kind regards,
> Geoffrey De Smet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
--
Patrik Dufresne
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20111206/0d7095c2/attachment.html
More information about the rules-users
mailing list