As you suggested, I ran the faulty process directly. The error was based in part a misinterpretation of the AND split functionality. It was flowing through unmatching rules and terminating the process before other rules had completed. Resolved it with AND join.
Kris Verlaenen wrote: > >> At issue, the rules within the second ruleflow, though activated, are not >> being executed. > > Do you have a test case that shows this behaviour? If you open a JIRA and > attach the test case, I'll take a look. Have you tried starting the > process > directly using the startProcess method on the working memory directly? > Does > this change the situation? In theory, there should be no difference in > starting a process, no matter how you start it. And ruleflow groups > should > only deactivate if there are no more activated rules in the ruleflow > group. > > Kris > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RHS-start-ruleflow-not-executing-associated-rules-tp19804474p19999806.html Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
