Re: [rules-users] Guvnor Integration with BPEL
Hi,
I am using guvnor to create rules and access it through java code in my
application.
I have create pachage Mypackage and one rule Myrule inside the
package.
The code to access the rules is -
public SubnetDTO getValidSubnet(SubnetDTO dto) {
ClassLoader old =
Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader();
try {
System.out.println(reading working business rules
-- );
Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(getClass().getClassLoader()
);
RuleAgent agent =
RuleAgent.newRuleAgent(/subnet.properties);
RuleBase ruleBase = agent.getRuleBase();
WorkingMemory workingMemory = ruleBase.newStatefulSession();
workingMemory.insert(dto);
workingMemory.fireAllRules();
for (Iterator i = workingMemory.iterateObjects();
i.hasNext();)
{
System.out.println(getCanonicalName
+i.next().getClass().getCanonicalName());
}
return dto;
} catch (Throwable t) {
t.printStackTrace();
}
finally
{
Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(old);
}
return null;
}
Subnet.properties contains url as -
url=http://localhost:8080/guvnor/org.drools.guvnor.Guvnor/package/Mypack
age/LATEST
Now I have created Myrule1 in the package Mypackage and tried to
access the both rule with the same url in the properties file.
But it is only validating the first rule only.
So let me know what changes I have to make to access both rules from the
package.
If any other approach is possible then suggest that also.
Thanks
Rabindra Kumar Srivastava | ATT04 | Tech Mahindra
Hinjewadi, Pune 411 057, INDIA
( Office: +91 20 4225 | Mobile: +91 9892232699| Ext: 253918
Email: rs0090...@techmahindra.com
www.techmahindra.com http://www.techmahindra.com/
Disclaimer:
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review
the policy at a
href=http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html;http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html/a
externally and a
href=http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html;http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html/a
internally within Tech
Mahindra.
image001.png___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
If you dump out the xml it converts the spreadsheet to you can see what the resulting DRL is. Mantis is right in what the output is – if you don’t merge the condition column you’ll get a drl as below (If there exists a Condition (c1) such that its payment $param(1) AND there exists a Condition (c2) such that its payment = $param(2). If you merge the condition column the constraints apply to the same Condition object with the comma being the implicit and (if there exists a Condition c1 such that its payment $param(1) AND its payment = $param(2). Thomas From: rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of john@oa Sent: 09 September 2011 16:28 To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org Subject: Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total Thanks Manstis Actually I found that the issue was caused by me having incorrectly placed the RuleTable statement in the spreadsheet, I believe the CONDITION's in the columns are by default: AND joined. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM, manstis [via Drools] [hidden email]/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323194i=0 wrote: Does your Condition span the two columns with the payment $param? e.g. | Condition | |-+--| |payment $param | payment = $param| |-+--| Otherwise you are creating rules that check the following:- when Condition(payment ) then ... when Condition(payment 1000) then ... Whereas you really require:- when Condition(payment 0, payment = 1000) then ... etc 2011/9/9 john@oa [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323110i=0 Thanks Iaune That is really helpful. Yes, I need the ranges to be mutually exclusive, what is the easiest way to do that? Feel a bit cheeky asking another question, but you seem to know what you are talking about! I have tried adding two conditions to enforce the range, but that doesn't seem to work - see below. I still get multiple rules firing. Also can you recommend any good resources for learning all of this, apart from the online documentation? Would you know if any of the Drools books are any good? payment $param payment = $param Payment Greater Than Payment Less Than or Equal To 0 0 1500 1500 2000 2000 3000 3000 4000 On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:22 PM, laune [via Drools] [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323074i=0 wrote: The error you get is due to the second condition (application: Application()) not being included in the generated rules. Empty cell means: the column's snippet is not included in the rule. Since you don't have a constraint for Application() you can employ a trick: remove the column and prefix the text application: Application() to the text in cell C7. In Rule 1, do you really want to test whether a payment is not greater than zero? Do you realize that Rules 2 and 3 would both fire for certain payment amounts? You can update a String field. To concatenate, use x.setString( x.getString() + whatever ); -W On 9 September 2011 14:08, john@oa [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3322896i=0 wrote: Guvnor: guvnor-5.2.0.Final-tomcat-6.0 Hi I am a Drools Newbie and I have an integer field called score that I need to add to when a rule matches in a spreadsheet decision table. i.e. the score field should hold a running total of all scores that are matched. However, I can't even update the field in the table. I have attached the spreadsheet for review. In this spreadsheet I am simply trying to set the score, and that is failing with: DScoringTable] Rule Compilation error application cannot be resolved My goal is to have different decision tables that will all need to update the same score, and keep a running total of the total score. Any help very much appreciated! I hope that I am just missing something obvious. http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n3322713/demo-score-sheet.xls demo-score-sheet.xlshttp://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n3322713/demo-score-sheet.xls%0Ademo-score-sheet.xls In future I may wish to also update a String field and keep concatenating to that field, is this possible? John -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Spreadsheet-Rule-Compilation-error-xxx-cannot-be-resolved-Keeping-running-total-tp3322713p3322713.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3322896i=1 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users ___ rules-users mailing list [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3322896i=2 https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
2011/9/12 Swindells, Thomas tswinde...@nds.com
If you dump out the xml
Why XML?
import org.drools.decisiontable.SpreadsheetCompiler;
private void testSpreadsheet(){
File dtf = new File( dtPath );
InputStream is;
try {
is = new FileInputStream( dtf );
SpreadsheetCompiler ssComp = new SpreadsheetCompiler();
String s = ssComp.compile( is, InputType.XLS );
System.out.println( === Begin generated DRL === );
System.out.println( s );
System.out.println( === End generated DRL === );
} catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
it converts the spreadsheet to you can see what the resulting DRL is.
Mantis is right in what the output is – if you don’t merge the condition
column you’ll get a drl as below (If there exists a Condition (c1) such that
its payment $param(1) AND there exists a Condition (c2) such that its
payment = $param(2).
If you merge the condition column the constraints apply to the same
Condition object with the comma being the implicit and (if there exists a
Condition c1 such that its payment $param(1) AND its payment = $param(2).
All correct, but the problem with this approach is the necessity of
providing identical values in two places - once as an upper limit and once
as a lower limit. By using the keyword Sequential true rules will be made
to fire from top to bottom. Adding a uniform constraint that guarantees that
the value-to-be-set hasn't been set yet (==null), a single constraint using
the value as an upper limit is sufficient.
-W
** **
Thomas
** **
*From:* rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *john@oa
*Sent:* 09 September 2011 16:28
*To:* rules-users@lists.jboss.org
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx)
cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
** **
Thanks Manstis
Actually I found that the issue was caused by me having incorrectly placed
the RuleTable statement in the spreadsheet, I believe the CONDITION's in
the columns are by default: AND joined.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM, manstis [via Drools] [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323194i=0
wrote:
Does your Condition span the two columns with the payment $param? e.g.
| Condition |
|-+--|
|payment $param | payment = $param|
|-+--|
Otherwise you are creating rules that check the following:-
when
Condition(payment )
then
...
when
Condition(payment 1000)
then
...
Whereas you really require:-
when
Condition(payment 0, payment = 1000)
then
...
etc
2011/9/9 john@oa [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323110i=0
Thanks Iaune
That is really helpful. Yes, I need the ranges to be mutually exclusive,
what is the easiest way to do that? Feel a bit cheeky asking another
question, but you seem to know what you are talking about! I have tried
adding two conditions to enforce the range, but that doesn't seem to work -
see below. I still get multiple rules firing. Also can you recommend any
good resources for learning all of this, apart from the online
documentation? Would you know if any of the Drools books are any good?***
*
payment $param
payment = $param
Payment Greater Than
Payment Less Than or Equal To
0
0
1500
1500
2000
2000
3000
3000
4000
** **
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:22 PM, laune [via Drools] [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323074i=0
wrote:
The error you get is due to the second condition (application:
Application()) not being included in the generated rules. Empty cell means:
the column's snippet is not included in the rule.
Since you don't have a constraint for Application() you can employ a trick:
remove the column and prefix the text application: Application() to the text
in cell C7.
In Rule 1, do you really want to test whether a payment is not greater than
zero?
Do you realize that Rules 2 and 3 would both fire for certain payment
amounts?
You can update a String field. To concatenate, use
x.setString( x.getString() + whatever );
-W
On 9 September 2011 14:08, john@oa [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3322896i=0
wrote:
Guvnor: guvnor-5.2.0.Final-tomcat-6.0
Hi
I am a Drools Newbie and I have an integer field called score that I need
to
add to when a rule matches in a spreadsheet decision table. i.e. the score
field should hold a running total of all scores that are matched. However,
I can't even update the field in the table. I have attached the
spreadsheet
for review. In this spreadsheet I am simply trying to set the score, and
that is failing with:
DScoringTable] Rule Compilation error application cannot be resolved
My goal is to
Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
Ah Okay, That kind of makes sense, although I can't seem to find any documentation on how to merge the condition column, i.e. to have to parameters in one column: Tried this to no avail (using the , as the implicit AND) Payment value $param1, value = $param2 Payment In Range 0, 1500 1500, 2000 2000, 3000 3000, 4000 4000, 5000 5000, 1 1, 15000 15000, 2 2 On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Swindells, Thomas [via Drools] ml-node+s46999n3328970...@n3.nabble.com wrote: If you dump out the xml it converts the spreadsheet to you can see what the resulting DRL is. Mantis is right in what the output is – if you don’t merge the condition column you’ll get a drl as below (If there exists a Condition (c1) such that its payment $param(1) AND there exists a Condition (c2) such that its payment = $param(2). If you merge the condition column the constraints apply to the same Condition object with the comma being the implicit and (if there exists a Condition c1 such that its payment $param(1) AND its payment = $param(2). ** ** Thomas ** ** *From:* [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=0[mailto:[hidden email] http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=1] *On Behalf Of *john@oa *Sent:* 09 September 2011 16:28 *To:* [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=2 *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total ** ** Thanks Manstis Actually I found that the issue was caused by me having incorrectly placed the RuleTable statement in the spreadsheet, I believe the CONDITION's in the columns are by default: AND joined. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM, manstis [via Drools] [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323194i=0 wrote: Does your Condition span the two columns with the payment $param? e.g. | Condition | |-+--| |payment $param | payment = $param| |-+--| Otherwise you are creating rules that check the following:- when Condition(payment ) then ... when Condition(payment 1000) then ... Whereas you really require:- when Condition(payment 0, payment = 1000) then ... etc 2011/9/9 john@oa [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323110i=0 Thanks Iaune That is really helpful. Yes, I need the ranges to be mutually exclusive, what is the easiest way to do that? Feel a bit cheeky asking another question, but you seem to know what you are talking about! I have tried adding two conditions to enforce the range, but that doesn't seem to work - see below. I still get multiple rules firing. Also can you recommend any good resources for learning all of this, apart from the online documentation? Would you know if any of the Drools books are any good?*** * payment $param payment = $param Payment Greater Than Payment Less Than or Equal To 0 0 1500 1500 2000 2000 3000 3000 4000 ** ** On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:22 PM, laune [via Drools] [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323074i=0 wrote: The error you get is due to the second condition (application: Application()) not being included in the generated rules. Empty cell means: the column's snippet is not included in the rule. Since you don't have a constraint for Application() you can employ a trick: remove the column and prefix the text application: Application() to the text in cell C7. In Rule 1, do you really want to test whether a payment is not greater than zero? Do you realize that Rules 2 and 3 would both fire for certain payment amounts? You can update a String field. To concatenate, use x.setString( x.getString() + whatever ); -W On 9 September 2011 14:08, john@oa [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3322896i=0 wrote: Guvnor: guvnor-5.2.0.Final-tomcat-6.0 Hi I am a Drools Newbie and I have an integer field called score that I need to add to when a rule matches in a spreadsheet decision table. i.e. the score field should hold a running total of all scores that are matched. However, I can't even update the field in the table. I have attached the spreadsheet for review. In this spreadsheet I am simply trying to set the score, and that is failing with: DScoringTable] Rule Compilation error application cannot be resolved My goal is to have different decision tables that will all need to update the same score, and keep a running total of the total score. Any help very much appreciated! I hope that I am just missing something obvious. http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n3322713/demo-score-sheet.xls demo-score-sheet.xls In future I may wish to also update a String field and keep concatenating to that field, is
Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
@john, Merging cells should be supported in your spreadsheet program of choice (I know Microsoft Excel and Open\Libre Office derivatives provide it). 2011/9/12 Swindells, Thomas tswinde...@nds.com I’ve no idea why I said xml rather than drl – still too early in the morning. ** ** It should be there in the documentation, you use $1 and $2 (etc). But in this case why do you want to it’s easier for people to insert the values into two separate columns. ** ** You want something like the following ** ** NAME CONDITION CONDITION f : Fact value $param Value = $param Rule Name Payment More than Payment max rule 1 1500 ** ** This also has the benefit you can add catchall rules for the top and bottom by leaving the appropriate column empty - eg payment = 0, or payment 2 ** ** Thomas ** ** *From:* rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org [mailto: rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *john@oa *Sent:* 12 September 2011 11:12 *To:* rules-users@lists.jboss.org *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total ** ** Ah Okay, That kind of makes sense, although I can't seem to find any documentation on how to merge the condition column, i.e. to have to parameters in one column: Tried this to no avail (using the , as the implicit AND) Payment value $param1, value = $param2 Payment In Range 0, 1500 1500, 2000 2000, 3000 3000, 4000 4000, 5000 5000, 1 1, 15000 15000, 2 2 ** ** On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Swindells, Thomas [via Drools] [hidden email] http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3329292i=0 wrote: If you dump out the xml it converts the spreadsheet to you can see what the resulting DRL is. Mantis is right in what the output is – if you don’t merge the condition column you’ll get a drl as below (If there exists a Condition (c1) such that its payment $param(1) AND there exists a Condition (c2) such that its payment = $param(2). If you merge the condition column the constraints apply to the same Condition object with the comma being the implicit and (if there exists a Condition c1 such that its payment $param(1) AND its payment = $param(2). Thomas *From:* [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=0[mailto:[hidden email] http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=1] *On Behalf Of *john@oa *Sent:* 09 September 2011 16:28 *To:* [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3328970i=2 *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total Thanks Manstis Actually I found that the issue was caused by me having incorrectly placed the RuleTable statement in the spreadsheet, I believe the CONDITION's in the columns are by default: AND joined. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM, manstis [via Drools] [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323194i=0 wrote: Does your Condition span the two columns with the payment $param? e.g. | Condition | |-+--| |payment $param | payment = $param| |-+--| Otherwise you are creating rules that check the following:- when Condition(payment ) then ... when Condition(payment 1000) then ... Whereas you really require:- when Condition(payment 0, payment = 1000) then ... etc 2011/9/9 john@oa [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323110i=0 Thanks Iaune That is really helpful. Yes, I need the ranges to be mutually exclusive, what is the easiest way to do that? Feel a bit cheeky asking another question, but you seem to know what you are talking about! I have tried adding two conditions to enforce the range, but that doesn't seem to work - see below. I still get multiple rules firing. Also can you recommend any good resources for learning all of this, apart from the online documentation? Would you know if any of the Drools books are any good?*** * payment $param payment = $param Payment Greater Than Payment Less Than or Equal To 0 0 1500 1500 2000 2000 3000 3000 4000 On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:22 PM, laune [via Drools] [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=3323074i=0 wrote: The error you get is due to the second condition (application: Application()) not being included in the generated rules. Empty cell means: the column's snippet is not included in the rule. Since you don't have a constraint for Application() you can employ a trick: remove the column and prefix the text application: Application() to
Re: [rules-users] Spreadsheet: Rule Compilation error (xxx) cannot be resolved: Keeping running total
2011/9/12 Swindells, Thomas tswinde...@nds.com [snip] still too early in the morning. NAME CONDITION CONDITION f : Fact value $param Value = $param Rule Name Payment More than Payment max rule 1 1500 To handle payment == 1, put a '0' into the cell below Payment More than Still, having to repeat 1500 in the next rule, etc., gives the impression that the programmer dumps work onto the user. All right - as long it isn't me ;-) -W ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
[rules-users] Exception cannot determine ruleInfo when trying to debug a rule
Hello, I'm using Eclipse 3.6.2 (Helios) and the Eclipse Plugin JBoss Tools 3.2.1.Final Stable Release. When I try to set a breakpoint within the rule concequence, I get the above mentioned exception. The breakpoint appers, but it is disregarded when debugging. Here you can see the whole description and error behaviour: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n3329759/debug_exception.png Do you know how to avoid this exception? Where can I set this ruleInfo data ? Many thanks for any idea / advice! Svetlomir. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Exception-cannot-determine-ruleInfo-when-trying-to-debug-a-rule-tp3329759p3329759.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
Re: [rules-users] rules for promotional offers
wolfgang,
I didnt get it, so does that mean that all CE will be re-evaluated on every
change of workingmemory no matter which rule fired? even when executing RHS.
I didnt test it with copy of list yet. I will do it and see.
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Wolfgang Laun wolfgang.l...@gmail.comwrote:
The result of the collect CE is changed due to the modify. You have to
copy the list and use the copy in the loop.
-W
2011/9/9 Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com:
Thanks wolfgang, for the info and that workaround.
I think there is some off by one error in for loop, or may be some
mistake
that I didnt notice in my code. the following rule with 3 objects gives
index out of bound error. I am attaching java drl file (package
com.example.drools.testing). I am using 5.2.0 final release.
rule Buy X units of Product A and Get Y units of Product B Free
when
$itemsA : ArrayList( $a : size = 2 ) from collect( CartItem(
productId == A, processed == false) )
$itemsB : ArrayList( $b : size = 1 ) from collect( CartItem(
productId == B, processed == false) )
$m : RuleMessage()
then
$m.addMessage(sizes- A=+$a + B=+$b);
int $x = 2;
int $y = 1;
$m.addMessage(sizes- X=+$x + Y=+$y);
for(int i=0 ; i $x ; i++){
CartItem $ci = (CartItem) $itemsA.get(i);
$m.addMessage( $ci.getId()+)Found item:
+$ci.getProductId());
modify((CartItem)$ci){
setProcessed(true),
setPromoItemDiscount(0D),
setPromoId(2),
setBundleId(bundler.getId()),
setAggregatorId(1)
};
};
for(int i=0 ; i $y ; i++){
CartItem $ci = (CartItem) $itemsB.get(i);
$m.addMessage( $ci.getId()+)Found item:
+$ci.getProductId());
modify((CartItem)$ci){
setProcessed(true),
setPromoItemDiscount($ci.getPrice()),
setPromoId(2),
setBundleId(bundler.getId()),
setAggregatorId(2)
};
};
bundler.increment();
end
error
Exception in thread main org.drools.runtime.rule.ConsequenceException:
rule: Buy X units of Product A and Get Y units of Product B Free
at
org.drools.runtime.rule.impl.DefaultConsequenceExceptionHandler.handleException(DefaultConsequenceExceptionHandler.java:39)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireActivation(DefaultAgenda.java:916)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireNextItem(DefaultAgenda.java:845)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireAllRules(DefaultAgenda.java:1056)
at
org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.fireAllRules(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:733)
at
org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.fireAllRules(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:699)
at
org.drools.impl.StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.fireAllRules(StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.java:218)
at com.example.drools.testing.Main.main(Main.java:52)
Caused by: java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: Index: 1, Size: 1
at java.util.ArrayList.RangeCheck(ArrayList.java:547)
at java.util.ArrayList.get(ArrayList.java:322)
at
com.example.drools.testing.Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0.defaultConsequence(Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0.java:12)
at
com.example.drools.testing.Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0DefaultConsequenceInvoker.evaluate(Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0DefaultConsequenceInvoker.java:44)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireActivation(DefaultAgenda.java:906)
... 6 more
2011/9/9 Wolfgang Laun wolfgang.l...@gmail.com
If the declared type of productId and getProductId() is String, it
should
be compared to a string literal. (A conversion might be made, but don't
rely
on that.)
You cannot access components of a global in RHS code using the
simplified
notation (not unless you use mvel - but don't do that.) Here, all
accesses
should be written the usual Java way, with getter and setter calls.
The problem you have with modify(ci) is a bug (fixed for 5.3.0). As a
workaround,use
modify( (CartItem)ci ){ ... }
-W
2011/9/9 Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com
some more info for the modify() problem, the CartItem is an interface
and
the implementation is CartItemImpl. if this info leads to some clues.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi here is the same thing converted to mvl
// this Bundler.java has integer member that keeps incrementing
global Bundler bundler
rule Apply 10% discount if you purchase 2 items
when
$s1 : CartItem( productId == 219759, processed == false)
$s2 : CartItem(
Re: [rules-users] rules for promotional offers
2011/9/12 Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com
wolfgang,
I didnt get it, so does that mean that all CE will be re-evaluated on every
change of workingmemory no matter which rule fired?
Not all CE, only the ones that are affected by the changed WME.
even when executing RHS. I didnt test it with copy of list yet. I will do
it and see.
By all means, do so.
-W
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Wolfgang Laun
wolfgang.l...@gmail.comwrote:
The result of the collect CE is changed due to the modify. You have to
copy the list and use the copy in the loop.
-W
2011/9/9 Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com:
Thanks wolfgang, for the info and that workaround.
I think there is some off by one error in for loop, or may be some
mistake
that I didnt notice in my code. the following rule with 3 objects gives
index out of bound error. I am attaching java drl file (package
com.example.drools.testing). I am using 5.2.0 final release.
rule Buy X units of Product A and Get Y units of Product B Free
when
$itemsA : ArrayList( $a : size = 2 ) from collect( CartItem(
productId == A, processed == false) )
$itemsB : ArrayList( $b : size = 1 ) from collect( CartItem(
productId == B, processed == false) )
$m : RuleMessage()
then
$m.addMessage(sizes- A=+$a + B=+$b);
int $x = 2;
int $y = 1;
$m.addMessage(sizes- X=+$x + Y=+$y);
for(int i=0 ; i $x ; i++){
CartItem $ci = (CartItem) $itemsA.get(i);
$m.addMessage( $ci.getId()+)Found item:
+$ci.getProductId());
modify((CartItem)$ci){
setProcessed(true),
setPromoItemDiscount(0D),
setPromoId(2),
setBundleId(bundler.getId()),
setAggregatorId(1)
};
};
for(int i=0 ; i $y ; i++){
CartItem $ci = (CartItem) $itemsB.get(i);
$m.addMessage( $ci.getId()+)Found item:
+$ci.getProductId());
modify((CartItem)$ci){
setProcessed(true),
setPromoItemDiscount($ci.getPrice()),
setPromoId(2),
setBundleId(bundler.getId()),
setAggregatorId(2)
};
};
bundler.increment();
end
error
Exception in thread main org.drools.runtime.rule.ConsequenceException:
rule: Buy X units of Product A and Get Y units of Product B Free
at
org.drools.runtime.rule.impl.DefaultConsequenceExceptionHandler.handleException(DefaultConsequenceExceptionHandler.java:39)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireActivation(DefaultAgenda.java:916)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireNextItem(DefaultAgenda.java:845)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireAllRules(DefaultAgenda.java:1056)
at
org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.fireAllRules(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:733)
at
org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.fireAllRules(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:699)
at
org.drools.impl.StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.fireAllRules(StatefulKnowledgeSessionImpl.java:218)
at com.example.drools.testing.Main.main(Main.java:52)
Caused by: java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: Index: 1, Size: 1
at java.util.ArrayList.RangeCheck(ArrayList.java:547)
at java.util.ArrayList.get(ArrayList.java:322)
at
com.example.drools.testing.Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0.defaultConsequence(Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0.java:12)
at
com.example.drools.testing.Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0DefaultConsequenceInvoker.evaluate(Rule_Buy_X_units_of_Product_A_and_Get_Y_units_of_Product_B_Free_0DefaultConsequenceInvoker.java:44)
at
org.drools.common.DefaultAgenda.fireActivation(DefaultAgenda.java:906)
... 6 more
2011/9/9 Wolfgang Laun wolfgang.l...@gmail.com
If the declared type of productId and getProductId() is String, it
should
be compared to a string literal. (A conversion might be made, but don't
rely
on that.)
You cannot access components of a global in RHS code using the
simplified
notation (not unless you use mvel - but don't do that.) Here, all
accesses
should be written the usual Java way, with getter and setter calls.
The problem you have with modify(ci) is a bug (fixed for 5.3.0). As a
workaround,use
modify( (CartItem)ci ){ ... }
-W
2011/9/9 Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com
some more info for the modify() problem, the CartItem is an interface
and
the implementation is CartItemImpl. if this info leads to some clues.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Sandeep Bandela gibsos...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi here is the same thing converted to mvl
// this Bundler.java has integer member that keeps incrementing
global Bundler bundler
rule
Re: [rules-users] Exception cannot determine ruleInfo when trying to debug a rule
Can you share with us which version of drools are you using? the runtime and the drools plugin. CHeers On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:29 AM, skasab2s skasa...@smail.inf.fh-brs.dewrote: Hello, I'm using Eclipse 3.6.2 (Helios) and the Eclipse Plugin JBoss Tools 3.2.1.Final Stable Release. When I try to set a breakpoint within the rule concequence, I get the above mentioned exception. The breakpoint appers, but it is disregarded when debugging. Here you can see the whole description and error behaviour: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n3329759/debug_exception.png Do you know how to avoid this exception? Where can I set this ruleInfo data ? Many thanks for any idea / advice! Svetlomir. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Exception-cannot-determine-ruleInfo-when-trying-to-debug-a-rule-tp3329759p3329759.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 -- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar - Salatino Salaboy Mauricio - ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
