Have a read of the release notes around type safety. There are some situations where Drools was not correctly enforcing type safety, which have since been corrected. So probably a badly written rule is now getting picked up. As a work around you can force some patterns to evaluate dynamically using @typesafe.
Mark On 13/02/2012 22:12, womuji wrote: > Hi, > > We are upgrading from Drools 5.1 to 5.3 to improve the performance, but we > are hoping to keep our drl files intact. We were trying to use the old drl > files by setting "drools.dialect.mvel.strict=false", but somehow with this > setting we still got " unable to resolve method using strict-mode .." error > from time to time. > > I'm wondering if there is any correlation between this strict-mode and the > performance gain, if in order to achieve the performance gain, we have to > set the strict-mode to true, then we will make changes to our drl files, > instead of spending time to figure out why the effect of > "drools.dialect.mvel.strict=false" is sporadic. > > Thanks. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/MVEL-strict-mode-vs-performance-tp3741814p3741814.html > Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > 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