"The max run is not being hit" was me being confused and should just be ignored (was thinking of run was being called with a parameter of 100). I am certain there are no other references to the NotSerializable object under my control as that is what I checked first. Adding debug to the Serialization code shows that the NotSerializable Object is embedded in a Fact object probably in the way that you describe (in the Agenda). With more tests we now see the problem sometimes (as in not always) which leads me to believe that the Agenda is 'cleaned' during 'run' only under certain conditions. It sounds like the upcoming release of jess will fix our problem and until then we have implemented a work around. Thank you for all of your help!
Thanks, Jim -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 10:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: JESS: retracted facts seem to hang around Well, although I did say that Alan was probably right that the undefinstanced object was being held in a stale activation, I didn't really suggest that calling "run" after calling undefinstance was the solution -- that's a pretty nasty solution, in any case. What I did for the next release (which I will send out today or tomorrow) is to put a writeObject() method into HeapPriorityQueue, which actually holds the agenda; this method "cleans" the agenda of any stale activations before writing it out. Now, I think there's a typo in your message below, as I don't understand what you mean by "The max run is not being hit". Calling run() here -should- clear the agenda and you shouldn't see the serialization problem. In any event, I wrote a test case to try to simulate what you described and found that I did indeed get the error, and it was fixed by either calling run() or by the patch I described above. So if you're still seeing a NotSerializableException, you might need to check around for other referenes under you control; for instance, do any of your other definstances refer to the undefinstanced object? Is it held in the store/fetch table? Does one of your Userfunctions have a reference to it? I think James Gallogly wrote: > Thanks for the rapid response, I am not completely convinced that these two > problems are exactly the same. As I understand the detailed problem that > Alan sent simply calling run after the retract should clear the agenda > appropriately. Below is the code that causes the problem: > > Rete r = GMain.instance().getEngine() > //retract fact of unserializable object > r.undefinstance(Federate.instance().getFedTime()); > //actually do this (beware other rules may fire as well) > r.run(); > > //Serialize the Rete Engine > SaveRestoreHelper.writeObject(r); > > The max run is not being hit during this process, (at least in my test > case). Its likely I just don't completely understand the problem Alan > described or it might be a mixture of two issues. Any help/thoughts are much > appreciated. > > Thanks, > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 8:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: JESS: retracted facts seem to hang around > > > > I think James Gallogly wrote: > > > > My goal is to serialize the Rete. I am definstanceing a Fact based off of > a > > non-serializble object, doing a bunch of stuff, then undefinstancing the > > non-serializble objects Fact just before Serializing the Rete. I get an > > exception thrown saying it was unable to Serialize the non-serializable > > object. This implies that somehow a reference to this retracted fact is > > hanging around in the Rete and is attempting to be serialized. > > > > Thanks for the report; see below: > > And I also think Alan Moore wrote: > > I don't know if there is a problem beyond what is described in > > Ernest's earlier post but this should clear some things up for you (I > > am including the post here since I couldn't find a link to it in the > > archives... go figure): > > Good call Alan; this is almost certainly the cause of Mr. Gallogly's > problem. I should be able to fix this for 6.1a3, which shouldn't be > too far in the future. One way to fix it without disturbing anything > at runtime would be to add an Agenda.writeObject() which removed > any deactivated Activation objects. > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Ernest Friedman-Hill > Distributed Systems Research Phone: (925) 294-2154 > Sandia National Labs FAX: (925) 294-2234 > Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > Livermore, CA 94550 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > --------------------------------------------------------- Ernest Friedman-Hill Distributed Systems Research Phone: (925) 294-2154 Sandia National Labs FAX: (925) 294-2234 Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov Livermore, CA 94550 -------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
