[rules-users] ClassCastException and "from collect" keyword issue?

[Wolfgang Laun]

Is rule "EXC_COLLAT_HOLDING_ARRANGEMENT" *absolutely* the only one where
both d2.rules.state.EvaluateRule and d2.autorating.data.model.Account
are referenced?
-W

On 31/01/2013, Tan, Kevin <Kevin.Tan at morganstanley.com> wrote:
> Hi rules users,
>
> I am having a problem with Drools 5.1.1 recently. The exception we had is:
>
> java.lang.ClassCastException:
> d2.rules.state.EvaluateRule cannot be cast to
> d2.autorating.data.model.Account
> org.drools.runtime.rule.ConsequenceException: rule:
> DERIVE_COLLAT_MECHANISM_PLEDGE
>
> Our rules are listed as below:
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> rule "DERIVE_COLLAT_MECHANISM_PLEDGE"
> no-loop true
> salience 19991
>     when
>        $RatingData : RatingRuleFact()
>        $contract : Contract()
>        $csaDoc : Document(documentId == $contract.csaId && status ==
> "Final/Signed")
>        (EvaluateRule(ruleName == "INSCOPE))
>     then
>         RuleProcessingOutput ruleOutput = $RatingData.getRuleOutput();
>         RuleResult result = new RuleResult(drools.getRule().getName(),
> $contract.getContractId(), $RatingData.getPrincipalPartyCountry());
>         ruleOutput.addRuleResult(result);
>         $contract.setCollateralMechanism(result.getRuleOutputText());
>         insertLogical(new EvaluateRule(drools.getRule().getName()));
> end
>
> rule "EXC_COLLAT_HOLDING_ARRANGEMENT"
> no-loop true
> salience 19985
>     when
>        $RatingData : RatingRuleFact()
>        $contract : Contract()
>        $noHoldingAgreementAccts : ArrayList()
>        from collect ( Account(collatNetId == $contract.contractId,
>                     businessUnit not in ("COMM", "FID", "FX", "IED",
> "SECLENDING", "SWAPS")) from $contract.collatAccounts
>        )
>        EvaluateRule(ruleName == "INSCOPE")
>     then
>         RuleProcessingOutput ruleOutput = $RatingData.getRuleOutput();
>         for (Object obj : $noHoldingAgreementAccts) {
>             Account acct = (Account) obj;
>             if (acct.getDp2Account() != null) {
>                 RuleResult result = new
> RuleResult(drools.getRule().getName(), $contract.getContractId(),
> $RatingData.getPrincipalPartyCountry());
>                 result.setAccountId(acct.getDp2Account().getAccountId());
>                 result.setRuleOutputText("BU has no Data");
>                 ruleOutput.addRuleResult(result);
>             }
>         }
>         if ($noHoldingAgreementAccts.size() > 0) {
>             insertLogical(new EvaluateRule(drools.getRule().getName()));
>         }
> end
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>
>
> *         In object Account(), we did not have any EvaluateRule() object in
> it.
>
> *         We also noticed after the "from collect" key word there are
> EvaluateRule() object defined after it(but the purpose is just to determine
> if this object exist or not in the Working Memory), in the LHS of each rule
> file.
>
> *         In the variable $noHoldingAgreementAccts, we are not supposed to
> see the object - EvaluateRule (BUT the exception is showing it is trying to
> cast EvaluateRule into Account)
>
>
> My question is are there any known problems/issues with the following
>
> -          Drools rule compilers
>
> -          Key word from collect
>
> -          Rules production memory
>
> -          Version 5.1.1
>
> that can make this happen? Any ideas will be appreciated. Thanks.
>
>
> Kevin Tan
> Morgan Stanley | Enterprise Data & Services
> 700 Rue Wellington | Floor 04
> Montreal, QC H3C 3S4
> Phone: +1 514 876-5756
> Kevin.Tan at morganstanley.com<mailto:Thanh.Dang at morganstanley.com>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> NOTICE: Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions
> or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute,
> advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
> Reform and Consumer Protection Act. If you have received this communication
> in error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the
> sender immediately. Mistransmission is not intended to waive confidentiality
> or privilege. Morgan Stanley reserves the right, to the extent permitted
> under applicable law, to monitor electronic communications. This message is
> subject to terms available at the following link:
> http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers If you cannot access these links,
> please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By
> messaging with Morgan Stanley you consent to the foregoing.
>