[rules-users] Fusion, Insert Events with timestamp in the past.

[Matteo Mortari]

Hi Sebastian,
As per your last email, your use case sounds very similar to my use case
scenario and I would second the suggestion from Wolfgang, switch from
realtime to pseudoclock may help.

I think the thread "[rules-users] Question about Fusion pseudoclock" in the
mailing list could help, and in my use case scenario I found the following
code example *extremely* valuable because I do mostly same

https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm-contributed-experiments/blob/master/twittercbr/src/main/java/org/drools/examples/twittercbr/TwitterCBROffline.java

I hope this helps you too.
This approach would solve for "network delay issue" but will induce another
problem, in case "network" never restores or delay gets outrageous.

Ciao
MM
 On 4 Jun 2014 12:00, "SebastianStehle" <mail2stehle at gmail.com> wrote:

> I see that the update process is not optimal, but can you tell me if my
> simple example should work or not?
>
> We get measurements from sensors. Because of network delay and other
> intermediate processes the timestamp of the measurements can be some
> seconds
> behind the time of the insert. In this case the rules with after would not
> work correctly as well.
>
> I am new to drools, so there is a high chance that I make some mistakes.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Fusion-Insert-Events-with-timestamp-in-the-past-tp4029843p4029847.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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20140604/d5095f9a/attachment.html