Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-03 Thread Mario Fusco
this last improvement and tell me if it works for you. Thanks, Mario -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Fusion-inconsistencies-at-increasing-event-throughputs-tp4028947p4029112.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-02 Thread Vieri
Hi all, We tested the commit using the latest snapshot (6.1.0-SNAPSHOT, I went quickly through the code and it seems the right version). Everything works as expected a part from a strange issue, that seems related to event throughput. Namely, when usic the basic pattern for counting (i.e. no

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-02 Thread Mario Fusco
to reproduce this problem? Thanks again, Mario -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Fusion-inconsistencies-at-increasing-event-throughputs-tp4028947p4029093.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-02 Thread Vieri
Mario, My fault. Here you are the drls: *Not working *(log #1 in my last mail) *[This is the drl I included in my first post to the list. The accumulate occurs in the when clause of the cron based rule.]* package it.intext.unity.test import it.intext.unity.test.SynthEvent; import

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-01 Thread Mark Proctor
We have this fixed now. Hopefully this will be in the nightly build, and available for testing tomorrow. I’ll ping with a link to the nightly builds once it’s available. Mark On 31 Mar 2014, at 14:34, Mark Proctor mproc...@codehaus.org wrote: We are still working on this, we’ve found a

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-01 Thread Mario Fusco
: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Fusion-inconsistencies-at-increasing-event-throughputs-tp4028947p4029070.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-04-01 Thread Vieri
timers. Thanks again for your help, Mario -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Fusion-inconsistencies-at-increasing-event-throughputs-tp4028947p4029070.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-31 Thread Mark Proctor
We are still working on this, we’ve found a number of related points, as we are doing a full audit of the code. We’ll post as soon as we have the fixes available in a nightly build, so that people can test. Mark On 29 Mar 2014, at 12:50, Mark Proctor mproc...@codehaus.org wrote: Mario has

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-29 Thread Vieri
Mark, thanks for your update. I don't know if this can help, but I added a simple AgendaEventListener to the test case and it seems that at some point drools stops matching the Create event rule, while facts (well, events) are still inserted and other rules are triggered properly. Vieri On 28

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-29 Thread Mark Proctor
Mario has found an issue at a sync point, which can happen if it’s trying to schedule a timer at the same time that it’s firing that same timer from an update. We are trying to resolve that now. See lines 121 and 394, which later impacts lines 289 and 330.

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-25 Thread Wolfgang Laun
A rule with timer will only continue firing if its first true state remains constant. This means that you can't do what you want to do this way. (You might set up a rule with a repeating or cron timer that inserts a Trigger fact that triggers the accumulate and is retracted, or do some similar

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-25 Thread Vieri
Wolfgang, thanks for the prompt reply. Inline comments. On 25 March 2014 09:12, Wolfgang Laun wolfgang.l...@gmail.com wrote: A rule with timer will only continue firing if its first true state remains constant. This means that you can't do what you want to do this way. (You might set up a

Re: [rules-users] Drools Fusion inconsistencies at increasing event throughputs

2014-03-25 Thread Mario Fusco
25 13:46:50 CET 2014] epm = 2969 Total events: 28000 [Tue Mar 25 13:47:00 CET 2014] epm = 2969 [Tue Mar 25 13:47:10 CET 2014] epm = 2969 Total events: 29000 [Tue Mar 25 13:47:20 CET 2014] epm = 2969 -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Fusion