[rules-users] Inconsistent behaviour of insertLogical in rules having from pattern
Hi all,
It is 2 days I am fighting with a strange behaviour of insertLogical in rules
having from pattern in conditions : it works the first time, and not after ...
-
Here is my use-case (simplified) :
I have a class that represent a Flight. A Flight has a start/end datetime and
is associated with a Airplane and a list of Crew :
class Flight {
String airplaneId;
ListString crewIds;
Date start;
Date end;
}
I want to maintain an alert list that contains all overlaps for each airplane
and each crew. So I have rules like:
rule Overlap Airplane
when
$f1 : Flight($airplaneId : airplaneId)
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, airplaneId == $airplaneId, ... and periods
intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight()
$crew : String from $f1.getCrewIds()
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, eval($f2.getCrewIds().contains($crew)) , ... and
periods intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
-
Ok. So what I do to test all that stuff :
- create a new session
- add a first single Flight -- no alerts at all, normal
- add a second Flight insersecting the first one with same airplane and same
crews list -- 3 new alerts inserted (one for airplane, one for each crew) :
normal
- remove this second Flight -- the 3 preivous alerts are retracted : still ok
- re-add this second Flight -- only the 'airplane' rule triggers, I only get
one new alert insteads of the previous same 3 The alerts not inserted
correspond to the rule having 'from' in it
-
To test that it is the source of the problem, I add a new explicit association
object that I insert in WM :
class CrewAffectation {
String idCrew;
String idFlight;
}
For each inserted Flight, I also insert corresponding new CrewAffectation
objects. (in case of retract, I retract them of course).
I change the last rule to something like :
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight($id1 : id
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, $id2 : id, ... and periods intersecting ... )
$crewAff1 : CrewAffectation($idCrew : idCrew, idFlight== $id1)
$crewAff2 : CrewAffectation(idCrew == $idCrew, idFlight== $id2)
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
And with this 'no-from' approach, everything is working as expected.
-
In addition, I suspect the truth maintenance system to have leaks, and notably
in the source kBase.
Why ? Because I was facing problems by reusing the same kBase to generate
multiples kSessions : The first session created reacted well, while all the
folowing not.
And it was in fact the same problem as the one described here : usage of from
and insertLogical in the same rule.
The first created session adds and retract my 3 alerts, the second created
session only adds the airplane alert.
With using the explicit association object, I can reuse my kBase and everything
is working well.
-
Does someone already faced the problem ?
Does it looks like a real bug to dev team or am I doing something wrong (but as
it work once, I guess it is a bug) ?
Vincent
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Inconsistent behaviour of insertLogical in rules having from pattern
Forgot to say : using drools 5.6.FINAL
- Mail original -
De: Vincent LEGENDRE vincent.legen...@eurodecision.com
À: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
Envoyé: Jeudi 28 Août 2014 15:28:49
Objet: [rules-users] Inconsistent behaviour of insertLogical in rules having
from pattern
Hi all,
It is 2 days I am fighting with a strange behaviour of insertLogical in rules
having from pattern in conditions : it works the first time, and not after ...
-
Here is my use-case (simplified) :
I have a class that represent a Flight. A Flight has a start/end datetime and
is associated with a Airplane and a list of Crew :
class Flight {
String airplaneId;
ListString crewIds;
Date start;
Date end;
}
I want to maintain an alert list that contains all overlaps for each airplane
and each crew. So I have rules like:
rule Overlap Airplane
when
$f1 : Flight($airplaneId : airplaneId)
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, airplaneId == $airplaneId, ... and periods
intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight()
$crew : String from $f1.getCrewIds()
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, eval($f2.getCrewIds().contains($crew)) , ... and
periods intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
-
Ok. So what I do to test all that stuff :
- create a new session
- add a first single Flight -- no alerts at all, normal
- add a second Flight insersecting the first one with same airplane and same
crews list -- 3 new alerts inserted (one for airplane, one for each crew) :
normal
- remove this second Flight -- the 3 preivous alerts are retracted : still ok
- re-add this second Flight -- only the 'airplane' rule triggers, I only get
one new alert insteads of the previous same 3 The alerts not inserted
correspond to the rule having 'from' in it
-
To test that it is the source of the problem, I add a new explicit association
object that I insert in WM :
class CrewAffectation {
String idCrew;
String idFlight;
}
For each inserted Flight, I also insert corresponding new CrewAffectation
objects. (in case of retract, I retract them of course).
I change the last rule to something like :
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight($id1 : id
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, $id2 : id, ... and periods intersecting ... )
$crewAff1 : CrewAffectation($idCrew : idCrew, idFlight== $id1)
$crewAff2 : CrewAffectation(idCrew == $idCrew, idFlight== $id2)
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
And with this 'no-from' approach, everything is working as expected.
-
In addition, I suspect the truth maintenance system to have leaks, and notably
in the source kBase.
Why ? Because I was facing problems by reusing the same kBase to generate
multiples kSessions : The first session created reacted well, while all the
folowing not.
And it was in fact the same problem as the one described here : usage of from
and insertLogical in the same rule.
The first created session adds and retract my 3 alerts, the second created
session only adds the airplane alert.
With using the explicit association object, I can reuse my kBase and everything
is working well.
-
Does someone already faced the problem ?
Does it looks like a real bug to dev team or am I doing something wrong (but as
it work once, I guess it is a bug) ?
Vincent
___
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
Re: [rules-users] Inconsistent behaviour of insertLogical in rules having from pattern
This list is now closed.
Please use the google group:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/drools-usage
Are the auto-responders informing people that the list is closed working?
Mark
On 28 Aug 2014, at 14:31, Vincent LEGENDRE vincent.legen...@eurodecision.com
wrote:
Forgot to say : using drools 5.6.FINAL
De: Vincent LEGENDRE vincent.legen...@eurodecision.com
À: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
Envoyé: Jeudi 28 Août 2014 15:28:49
Objet: [rules-users] Inconsistent behaviour of insertLogical in rules having
from pattern
Hi all,
It is 2 days I am fighting with a strange behaviour of insertLogical in rules
having from pattern in conditions : it works the first time, and not after ...
-
Here is my use-case (simplified) :
I have a class that represent a Flight. A Flight has a start/end datetime and
is associated with a Airplane and a list of Crew :
class Flight {
String airplaneId;
ListString crewIds;
Date start;
Date end;
}
I want to maintain an alert list that contains all overlaps for each airplane
and each crew. So I have rules like:
rule Overlap Airplane
when
$f1 : Flight($airplaneId : airplaneId)
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, airplaneId == $airplaneId, ... and periods
intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight()
$crew : String from $f1.getCrewIds()
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, eval($f2.getCrewIds().contains($crew)) , ...
and periods intersecting ... )
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
-
Ok. So what I do to test all that stuff :
- create a new session
- add a first single Flight -- no alerts at all, normal
- add a second Flight insersecting the first one with same airplane and
same crews list -- 3 new alerts inserted (one for airplane, one for each
crew) : normal
- remove this second Flight -- the 3 preivous alerts are retracted : still
ok
- re-add this second Flight -- only the 'airplane' rule triggers, I only
get one new alert insteads of the previous same 3 The alerts not
inserted correspond to the rule having 'from' in it
-
To test that it is the source of the problem, I add a new explicit
association object that I insert in WM :
class CrewAffectation {
String idCrew;
String idFlight;
}
For each inserted Flight, I also insert corresponding new CrewAffectation
objects. (in case of retract, I retract them of course).
I change the last rule to something like :
rule Overlap Crews
when
$f1 : Flight($id1 : id
$f2 : Flight(this != $1, $id2 : id, ... and periods intersecting ... )
$crewAff1 : CrewAffectation($idCrew : idCrew, idFlight== $id1)
$crewAff2 : CrewAffectation(idCrew == $idCrew, idFlight== $id2)
then
insertLogical(new Alert(...));
end
And with this 'no-from' approach, everything is working as expected.
-
In addition, I suspect the truth maintenance system to have leaks, and
notably in the source kBase.
Why ? Because I was facing problems by reusing the same kBase to generate
multiples kSessions : The first session created reacted well, while all the
folowing not.
And it was in fact the same problem as the one described here : usage of from
and insertLogical in the same rule.
The first created session adds and retract my 3 alerts, the second created
session only adds the airplane alert.
With using the explicit association object, I can reuse my kBase and
everything is working well.
-
Does someone already faced the problem ?
Does it looks like a real bug to dev team or am I doing something wrong (but
as it work once, I guess it is a bug) ?
Vincent
___
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
Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion (CEP) event life cycle
Hello. Indeed, I have tested with the @expires and the objects are discarded in this case. What I had understood in the documentation is precisely the other way that the engine is expected to control the events expiration : Inferred Expiration (8.8.2), when no temporal constraint involves the objects, they are discarded. This seems the best way to be sure to eliminate as soon as possible all the useless objects, whatever their life time. This is particularly important with flows of thousands of events per second. Perhaps I don't understand this well... Another idea or advice ? Thanks for your help. Regards. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-Fusion-CEP-event-life-cycle-tp4030471p4030727.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
