Jonathan,
thanks for the hints. This seems to be a critical bug, could you please
provide some additional details
or, ideally, the unit test that you are running?
It would be really appreciated
Thanks
Davide
On 11/18/2013 04:28 PM, Jonathan Knehr wrote:
> I only use it from a single thread. What I meant was that for example, for
> the same set of rules, the issue never was created with, say, 20 iterations
> of inserting the same facts/events over again. Instead, it was more on the
> order of a few hundred thousand before the NPEs started showing up. Literally
> running the same unit test in a loop until it NPE'ed. But all from a single
> thread...
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 4:00 PM, Davide Sottara <dso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Jonathan,
>> Drools 5.5 was never meant to be multi-threaded. 5.6 tries to put a few
>> patches here and there, 6.0 is going in that direction and 6.1 will
>> hopefully solve the problem.
>> Thanks for the hint to the "internal hash table", it may give us ideas
>> on what to test next. However, if you or anyone could ever reproduce the
>> issue and submit a test
>> case that would be REALLY appreciated
>> Thanks
>> Davide
>>
>>> On 11/18/2013 12:04 PM, Jonathan Knehr wrote:
>>> In the past I've tried to reproduce a similar issue.
>>>
>>> Don't know if this will help, but I could not reproduce the NPEs without
>>> running a large amount of events into the rule engine. A small unit test
>>> never reproduced these issues for me, which made it harder. Not sure about
>>> this issue in particular, but other ones I've seen seem to be related to
>>> the internal hash table eventually misplacing objects. This created all
>>> sorts of odd symptoms, namely NPEs all over the place in random drools
>>> classes. But I think all of these are just symptoms of the same bug at the
>>> core level somewhere. They all are related IMO.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Davide Sottara <dso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I tried to reproduce the problem, with no success.
>>>> Could you please create a self-contained unit test?
>>>> If confirmed, I'll fix the problem as soon as possible
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Davide
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/14/2013 04:48 AM, abr wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried to switch from 5.5.0.Final to 5.6.0.CR1 and got a null pointer
>>>>> exception in the evaluation of the after evaluator.
>>>>> (Exact method is:
>>>>> /org.drools.base.evaluators.AfterEvaluatorDefinition.AfterEvaluator.evaluate(InternalWorkingMemory,
>>>>> InternalReadAccessor, InternalFactHandle, InternalReadAccessor,
>>>>> InternalFactHandle)/ )
>>>>>
>>>>> When debugging, the exception occurs at the very first line of the method,
>>>>> in:
>>>>> / if ( extractor1.isNullValue( workingMemory, handle1.getObject() ) ||
>>>>> extractor2.isNullValue( workingMemory, handle2.getObject() ) ) {
>>>>> return false;
>>>>> }
>>>>> /
>>>>> The cause of the exception is that handle1 is null.
>>>>>
>>>>> The rule where the exception occurs looks like:
>>>>> / MyFact(
>>>>> fromdate before[ 0d ] $min,
>>>>> ( todate == null || todate after[ 0d ] $max ) )
>>>>> /
>>>>>
>>>>> When the exception occurs, /MyFact.fromdate/ is not null, /$min/ is not
>>>>> null, /MyFact.todate/ is null, /$max/ is not null.
>>>>> In AfterEvaluator.evaluate : /extractor1/ refers to /MyFact.todate/,
>>>>> /extractor2/ refers to /$max/, /handle1/ is null, /handle2/ refers to the
>>>>> fact including the attribute to which /$max/ variable is bound to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, this worked fine in 5.5.0.Final.
>>>>> I couldn't test this out in Drools 6.0.0.CR5 because I have dependencies
>>>>> to
>>>>> drools-spring JAR that does not exist anymore in 6.0.0.CR5.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it simple to fix this problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Alexis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/5-6-0-CR1-gives-a-NullPointerException-in-after-evaluator-tp4026780.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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
