As a newbie to Drools (using v4.0.7), I'm struggling a bit with the
right way to express the following concept
I have a ParentFactObject with an array of ChildFactObjects.
The ChildFactObjects have a boolean attribute TestMe
I want to pattern match all ParentFactObjects for whom all
Wolfgang -
Thanks for your reply. As I said in the original subject line -- bizarre
bug or user error?
Well, it turns out to have been user error -- There was another rule in
the rulebase that was altering values on the PolicySet objects, but
failing to update() them. This caused the Rule
Paul -
Drools does not appear to have done well on those benchmarks, but the paper
does not seem to mention which version of Drools was used. Did I miss that? Do
you know which version it was?
Tom Murphy
Business Process Consultant
Wells Fargo HCFG - CORE Deal Decisioning Platform
800 S. Jordan
The following block of code inside org.drools.base.ClassFieldReader is throwing
an exception and I don't quite understand why. Can anyone advise? Thanks in
advance.
public int getIntValue(InternalWorkingMemory workingMemory,
final Object object) {
return this.reader.getIntValue(
Sorry - forgot to add the nature of the exception - java.lang.Long cannot be
cast to java.lang.Integer
Tom Murphy
Business Process Consultant
Wells Fargo HCFG - CORE Deal Decisioning Platform
800 S. Jordan Creek Parkway | West Des Moines, IA 50266
MAC: X2301-01B
Office: 515 324 4853 | Mobile:
Thanks for the reply, Edson.
After several hours, I finally tracked down the source of the issue. In one of
our rules, the following appeared as part of the LHS:
$asset_count : Integer(intValue 3) from accumulate (
Asset
(
Apologies if this question has been addressed before.
We generate our Drools rules automatically from a business rules repository
we've had here for years.
Currently, our code generator is doing something I'd rather not have to do - it
inspects assignments on the RHS and inserts anti-recursion
Hi.
I'm struggling with a rule flow that contains another rule flow.
Rule flow 1 - first step is to invoke a sub-process, call it rule flow 2.
Rule flow 2 executes fine, with correct internal branching logic.
Rule flow 2 proceeds to an End object with terminates set to false.
After RF2 completes,
Thanks to Travis Scheponik for trying to help me resolve this. However, neither
he nor I could figure it out.
Babak solved it here at the boot camp - the subprocesses should have their end
nodes with terminate set to TRUE not false, and the parent process should
invoke the subprocess with
We have a fairly complex object model, but we're still puzzled - I thought that
the definition of Activation was that the data matched on all conditions of a
rule, and therefore the rule was entered into the agenda (activated).
If that is true, I cannot figure out why we're experiencing this.
As
Thanks for the reply, Wolfgang.
If I understand your scenario correctly, I think you are describing the
expected activation patterns during the firing of this rule. I agree with your
description, and our logs show something very similar.
Responding to your specific suggestions -
1. The data
Edson -
Sorry, I forgot to mention the version number.
I'm using Drools 5.0.1.
If you also observe the incorrect behavior in 5.0.1, I'll try the trunk.
If you're not able to, then it must be something I'm doing.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:38:08 -0400
From: Edson Tirelli ed.tire...@gmail.com
Edson - please disregard my question on this - we've found out the root cause.
The data types of the borrowerNumber and the creditBorrowerNumber attributes,
which are deep inside a complex object hierarchy, are different - one is string
and one is short.
We'll deal with that issue now that we
Thanks, everyone, for your insightful responses. You've made my day...
Tom Murphy
Business Process Consultant
Wells Fargo HCFG - CORE Deal Decisioning Platform
800 S. Jordan Creek Parkway | West Des Moines, IA 50266
MAC: X2301-01B
Office: 515 324 4853 | Mobile: 941 320 8014
This message may
After all this time working with Drools 5.0.1, I thought I'd figured out all
the ways my syntax could fail, but this one has me stumped.
Any help would be appreciated.
I have the following rule:
rule RS6051.1.2_
dialect mvel
when
Applicant ( $ApplicantNumber :
Doh!
Thanks, guys!
I’ve done that before, too slapping forehead.
Tom Murphy
Business Process Consultant
Wells Fargo HCFG - CORE Deal Decisioning Platform
800 S. Jordan Creek Parkway | West Des Moines, IA 50266
MAC: X2301-01B
Office: 515 324 4853 | Mobile: 515 423 4334
This message may contain
Using Drools Expert 5.0.1
The following rule fires both when the not is there, and also if the not is
commented out. Clearly, both cannot be true, so there is something wrong
somewhere.
I've narrowed it down to the testing of the $parentEmploymentId declaration -
the AccountHolder CE, which
Actually, in the light of day, I see why it behaved as it did. It doesn't seem
to be caused by the AccountHolder as such, but more the Employment object - if
there are two of them, one with an accountholder and BusinessName that met the
criteria, and one without, then the rule will fire whether
Edson - please disregard the issue - we've found out the root cause. The
datatypes of the borrowerNumber and the creditBorrowerNumber, which are deep
inside an object hierarchy, are different - one is string and one is short.
We'll deal with that issue now that we understand it. Thanks for your
Thanks Edson, however here is more info on the issue as I've been playing with
it:
1. I have other elements in other objects referenced within the same rule
group that start with capital letters and they have no problem. Example:
, FHAMaxBaseMortgageWithToleranceAmt
Thanks, Wolfgang.
Is it possible the error is in the internal treatment of caps in the code that
converts
MICompanyMarketClassification in (2, 3)
to
MICompanyMarketClassification == 2 || MICompanyMarketClassification == 3
Why I think this:
The only place the capitalization seems harmful is
21 matches
Mail list logo
