This was a duplicate of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3111 that was fixed last week. It will be released in 5.3.0.final.
Edson 2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <tswinde...@nds.com> > Ouch looks like we and anybody on 5.1.1 needs to desperately update then.* > *** > > Though I am rather concerned by this issue > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3211 “Rules fires on incorrect > condition” – has this been looked at/is the issue correct as a rules engine > which fires random rules when it shouldn’t would be problematic!**** > > ** ** > > Thomas**** > > ** ** > > *From:* rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org [mailto: > rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Wolfgang Laun > *Sent:* 18 October 2011 11:05 > *To:* Rules Users List > *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Help! Activations firing out of salience > order**** > > ** ** > > There used to be a subtle bug in the PriorityHeapQueue containing the > activations. > > See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3044 > > -W**** > > 2011/10/18 Swindells, Thomas <tswinde...@nds.com>**** > > In our project we have been experiencing a large number of intermittent > unit test failures when we are testing our rules (on drools 5.1.1).**** > > After a lot of debugging, examining our rules for logic errors, > experimenting and generally scratching our head trying to work out what is > wrong, we have noticed that sometimes (but very intermittently) activations > are firing in the wrong order.**** > > **** > > In our rulebase we have two rules, Rule A salience 80 and Rule B salience > 70. Whilst debugging we made Rule A and B are identical other than rule B > having some additional constraints on the end. **** > > Dumping out the agenda events we have observed the following actions > occurring:**** > > BEFORE_FIRED rule X**** > > CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule A**** > > CREATED_ACTIVATION Rule B**** > > AFTER_FIRED rule X**** > > **** > > … (no references to either rule/activation)**** > > **** > > BEFORE_FIRED Rule B**** > > CANCELLED Rule A**** > > AFTER_FIRED Rule B**** > > **** > > How can Rule B be firing before Rule A when both activations exist?**** > > Does anybody know of any bugs in 5.1.1 that may be causing this? **** > > We have a branch of code on 5.3 and that also has had intermittent unit > test failures, we’ve not had chance to examine whether this is the same > pattern or just a different logic issue.**** > > **** > > Please help,**** > > **** > > Thomas**** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > > > ************************************************************************************** > This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you > have received this message in error, please immediately notify the > postmas...@nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies. > The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for > employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not > print this e-mail unless necessary. > > NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 > 4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered > no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00 > > ************************************************************************************** > **** > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > -- Edson Tirelli JBoss Drools Core Development JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users