Re: [rules-users] What is the use of Annotation in DeclarativeModel
To add the @role(event) annotation so that you can use CEP operators and CEP windows in rule authoring in Guvnor. sent on the move On 14 Feb 2012 06:27, "Veera" wrote: > Hi All, > > > > anybody give me some idea on annotations which are there in Fact > Declarative > Model in Guvnor.. > If it possible give me one example > > Thanks in advance.. > > > Regards, > Veera > > -- > View this message in context: > http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/What-is-the-use-of-Annotation-in-DeclarativeModel-tp3742852p3742852.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] Semi-locked planning entities
Is there any example in drools-planner with semi-locked planning entities? or how to implement? I dont understand :) -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Semi-locked-planning-entities-tp3743318p3743318.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] Copy & Paste options in Decision Table
Hi all, i was seen a video with below link he is doing copy & paste in Guvnor Decision table. I am using Guvnor 5.3.0, but it is not showing copy & paste options for me.. can any body tell me why ?. link is : http://vimeo.com/35323602 Thanks in Advance :-) Regards, veera -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Copy-Paste-options-in-Decision-Table-tp3743350p3743350.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] 5.4 stability?
Hi folks,With 5.3.0.Final I have crashed into the brick wall of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GUVNOR-1726 which makes templates pretty much useless.Now Jira mentions that this should be fixed in 5.4.0 beta1, so I'm thinking that it should still be fixed in beta 2. Not having the ability to build these rule templates is a pretty big issue for me, but I don't want to give myself a whole load more headaches by switching to something too flaky. So can anybody give me some idea of how stable beta 2 is at the moment? If I were to perform the upgrade would I be likely to spend a few days fire-fighting?Steve ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Copy & Paste options in Decision Table
Probably the video is using the latest snapshot from the master repository. You can compile the source code from master: github.com/droolsjbpm/guvnor Cheers On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Veera wrote: > Hi all, > > i was seen a video with below link he is doing copy & paste in Guvnor > Decision table. > I am using Guvnor 5.3.0, but it is not showing copy & paste options for me.. > > can any body tell me why ?. > > link is : http://vimeo.com/35323602 > > Thanks in Advance :-) > > Regards, > veera > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Copy-Paste-options-in-Decision-Table-tp3743350p3743350.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
Re: [rules-users] Copy & Paste options in Decision Table
It is only in 5.4. The video blurb is not clear. I have corrected this. On 14 February 2012 11:23, Mauricio Salatino wrote: > Probably the video is using the latest snapshot from the master > repository. You can compile the source code from master: > github.com/droolsjbpm/guvnor > > Cheers > > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Veera wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > i was seen a video with below link he is doing copy & paste in Guvnor > > Decision table. > > I am using Guvnor 5.3.0, but it is not showing copy & paste options for > me.. > > > > can any body tell me why ?. > > > > link is : http://vimeo.com/35323602 > > > > Thanks in Advance :-) > > > > Regards, > > veera > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Copy-Paste-options-in-Decision-Table-tp3743350p3743350.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 > ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] [planner] Semi-locked planning entities
No example yet :(
This feature isn't even implemented yet, vote for
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3359
A workaround is to have your Solution have 2 lists of your "entities"
class Roster {
List<...> immutableAssignements; // gets added in getProblemFacts()
List<...> mutableAssignements; // this getter gets
@PlanningEntityCollectionProperty
}
Op 14-02-12 11:56, Nurlan schreef:
> Is there any example in drools-planner with semi-locked planning entities?
>
> or how to implement? I dont understand :)
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Semi-locked-planning-entities-tp3743318p3743318.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
>
--
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
[rules-users] Testing for global variable
Is there a way to test for the existence of a global variable in a StatelessKnowledgeSession before inserting a SetGlobal command into a BatchExecutionCommand? I am trying to write a rules executor class that may execute some rulesets that need a particular global variable and some that don't. So I would like to be able to automatically test whether the rules that I am about to execute have the global variable and if they do not then not to insert the SetGlobal into the batch. I am using DRools 5.1 Chris Selwyn ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Copy & Paste options in Decision Table
Thanks a lot -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Copy-Paste-options-in-Decision-Table-tp3743350p3743533.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] Copy & Paste options in Decision Table
Thanks a lot... :-) -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Copy-Paste-options-in-Decision-Table-tp3743350p3743538.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] Testing for global variable
But you can
try{ ks.setGlobal(...) } catch( Exception e ){ }
-W
On 14/02/2012, Chris Selwyn wrote:
> Is there a way to test for the existence of a global variable in a
> StatelessKnowledgeSession before inserting a SetGlobal command into a
> BatchExecutionCommand?
>
> I am trying to write a rules executor class that may execute some rulesets
> that need a particular global variable and some that don't.
> So I would like to be able to automatically test whether the rules that I am
> about to execute have the global variable and if they do not then not to
> insert the SetGlobal into the batch.
>
> I am using DRools 5.1
>
> Chris Selwyn
> ___
> 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] Testing for global variable
I tried that but it seems that setting a global on a Stateless session simply
sets a value in a Map without doing any validation, hence no Exception.
What I am doing now is to set the value in the Stateless session. It seems that
those variables are made available to the StatefulSession that sls.execute()
creates underneath the covers. That way I
don't have to declare the global in those rulesets that don't use it.
Chris
On 14/02/2012 13:31, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
> But you can
>try{ ks.setGlobal(...) } catch( Exception e ){ }
>
> -W
>
> On 14/02/2012, Chris Selwyn wrote:
>> Is there a way to test for the existence of a global variable in a
>> StatelessKnowledgeSession before inserting a SetGlobal command into a
>> BatchExecutionCommand?
>>
>> I am trying to write a rules executor class that may execute some rulesets
>> that need a particular global variable and some that don't.
>> So I would like to be able to automatically test whether the rules that I am
>> about to execute have the global variable and if they do not then not to
>> insert the SetGlobal into the batch.
>>
>> I am using DRools 5.1
>>
>> Chris Selwyn
>> ___
>> 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] uninitialized planning value [error]
Is it possible setting planning entity with uninitialized planning value into solution? if it is possible, then how? :) plz, help me :) When I execute my code with not null planning variables everything work fine, but when i execute without setting planning variables I have [Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException] 2012-02-14 17:32:08,119 [main] INFO Solver started: time spend (0), score (null), new best score (null), random seed (0). Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException at org.drools.planner.core.score.definition.HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.calculateTimeGradient(HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.java:73) at org.drools.planner.core.score.definition.HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.calculateTimeGradient(HardAndSoftScoreDefinition.java:25) at org.drools.planner.core.termination.ScoreAttainedTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(ScoreAttainedTermination.java:52) at org.drools.planner.core.termination.OrCompositeTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(OrCompositeTermination.java:70) at org.drools.planner.core.termination.OrCompositeTermination.calculateSolverTimeGradient(OrCompositeTermination.java:70) at org.drools.planner.core.termination.PhaseToSolverTerminationBridge.calculatePhaseTimeGradient(PhaseToSolverTerminationBridge.java:49) at org.drools.planner.core.localsearch.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase.solve(DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase.java:55) at org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.runSolverPhases(DefaultSolver.java:166) at org.drools.planner.core.solver.DefaultSolver.solve(DefaultSolver.java:138) at kz.bee.drools.planner.dating.DatingMain.start(DatingMain.java:58) at kz.bee.drools.planner.dating.DatingMain.main(DatingMain.java:38) -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/uninitialized-planning-value-error-tp3743831p3743831.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] rule group activation by concurrent jbpm processes
Hi,
We've gained some insight about what is happening under the hood for this
kind of interaction between JBPM and Drools expert.
Imagine a knowledge session with this set of rules:
rule "new case"
when
$object : Object(processed==false) from entry-point "my stream"
then
ProcessInstance
processInstance=kcontext.getKnowledgeRuntime().createProcessInstance("my.Process",
parameters);
insert(processInstance);
end
rule "complete"
ruleflow-group "process complete"
no-loop true
when
$processInstance: WorkflowProcessInstance()
then
System.out.println("Fired!" + $processInstance);
end
And a process that runs a time consuming task before reaching a
bussinessruletask node that calls the "process complete" group of rules.
What is happening from Drool's expert point of view is the following
sequence of events:
1 - A fact is inserted that triggers the rule "new case". An Activation
is inserted into the agenda.
2 - As this is running in a fireUntilHalt loop then, almost
inmediatelly, the previous activation is fired and it's consquence is
evaluated leading to the insertion of the process instance as a fact in the
knowledge session. The process is now executing.
3 - This very new fact triggers the activation of the rule "complete"
( as it's only condition is that a processinstance exists ). It's
consequence gets evaluated and as it belongs to a group of rules, an
Activation is added to the ruleFlowGroup inside the Agenda. Nothing happens
thereafter.
4 - Another fact of the same type arrives and steps 1,2 and 3 execute
for the new fact. Now, the agenda has two Activations stored in the
ruleFlowGroup.
5 - At this time, the task in the first process ends, the
businessruletask gets executed and JBPM calls "activateRuleFlowGroup" on
the Agenda and the rule flow group gets activated.
6 - Inmediatelly the group of rules fires two activations ( both queued
at process fact insertion when the process was started ), when only one
process ended.
7 - So at least one rule gets evaluated for a process instance that
didn't belong to it .. :(
Then , "We have added special logic to make sure that a variable
processInstance of type WorkflowProcessInstance
will only match to the current process instance and not to other process
instances in the Working Memory." doesn't hold to be true, as our rule is
fired *before* it's process asks Drools to do so.
We've tested this behaviour in Drools 5.1.0, 5.2.0 and 5.3.0. All fail to
fulfill the requirements in the documentation.
What's worring us is that there seems to be no difference between actions
in the agenda as they're instances of AgendaItem class wich has no means to
discriminate between Activations ( at least there's no clear path to guess
the attached process instance ).
Bug report?
If this is a bug ( or lack of use case ) we will be more than happy to
submit a patch for it, just will need some hints...
Alberto R. Galdo
arga...@gmail.com
2012/2/13 Esteban Aliverti
> The behavior you described is how it is working in 5.3 (and it seems 5.2
> too). The rule is fired once per process instance you have in your working
> memory no matter if the others instances are, are not yet or even has
> already been in that Rule Task Node. Again, I'm not sure if this is a
> deliberated feature or a bug, but according to the documentation, it is a
> bug.
> One workaround could be that the process inserts a control fact containing
> its own id right before the Task Node is ejecuted (this could be done in a
> listener or in the on-entry action property of the node).
> Your rule then will look like this:
>
> rule "process complete"
> ruleflow-group "Complete task group"
> when
> $ControlFact($id: processIntanceId)
> $processInstance: WorkflowProcessInstance(instanceId == $id)
>
> then
> System.out.println("processInstance.id " +
> $processInstance.getId());
> retract ($id)
> end
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
>
> Esteban Aliverti
> - Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
>
>
> 2012/2/13 Alberto R. Galdo
>
>> We're using 5.2.0 final here.
>>
>> What we are also observing is that whenever a process instance reaches a
>> businessruletask node the rule gets fired a number of times equal to the
>> number of instantiated processes even if any of those processes didn't
>> reach the bussinessruletask node.
>>
>> Does this means that whenever a businessruletask is reached in any of the
>> current process instance, the rule gets fired for *all* the instances of
>> the process and subsequent businessruletask nodes won't fire anything?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/2/13 Esteban Aliverti
>>
>>> I had some tests working fine in jbpm 5.1 but failing in 5.3 because of
>>> this same reason. I'm not sure if this is this is a regression bug or if
>>> there is a deliberated change in the behavior.
>>> Maybe s
Re: [rules-users] 5.4 stability?
Stephen, have you tried the enterprise bits of Drools - BRMS? It goes through heavy testing and therefore you will avoid the instability of our .org bits. Let me know if you need more information. BRMS 5.2 is pretty stable from my experience, and Drools Templates definitely works in BRMS 5.2. Brad Davis Email: bda...@redhat.com | c: 980.226.7865 | http://www.redhat.com - Original Message - From: "Stephen Masters" To: "Drools" Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:22:46 AM Subject: [rules-users] 5.4 stability? Hi folks, With 5.3.0.Final I have crashed into the brick wall of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GUVNOR-1726 which makes templates pretty much useless. Now Jira mentions that this should be fixed in 5.4.0 beta1, so I'm thinking that it should still be fixed in beta 2. Not having the ability to build these rule templates is a pretty big issue for me, but I don't want to give myself a whole load more headaches by switching to something too flaky. So can anybody give me some idea of how stable beta 2 is at the moment? If I were to perform the upgrade would I be likely to spend a few days fire-fighting? Steve ___ 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] Guvnor - expected value of a list
Hello, I have the following problem: i would like to compare a value in expected section of a Guvnor test. Guvnor says actual value is: (Actual: [test1, test1]) When i enter [test1, test1] to the expected value it will not match with actual. Is it possible to compare list values? If yes, what is the syntax? Thanks, Peter -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Guvnor-expected-value-of-a-list-tp3744129p3744129.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] Guvnor - expected value of a list
I assume this is a QA \ Test Scenario in Guvnor? It's going to be helpful if you can provide an export of your repository (or an extract) showing the issue. On 14 February 2012 16:12, gombasp wrote: > Hello, > > I have the following problem: i would like to compare a value in expected > section of a Guvnor test. Guvnor says actual value is: > > (Actual: [test1, test1]) > > When i enter [test1, test1] to the expected value it will not match with > actual. > Is it possible to compare list values? If yes, what is the syntax? > > Thanks, > > Peter > > -- > View this message in context: > http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Guvnor-expected-value-of-a-list-tp3744129p3744129.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
Re: [rules-users] Fwd: Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to 5.3Final
As long as the result of the evaluationis same we are fine with it. One more question regarding to the data migration. In Drools 5.0 there is no restriction between the fact type and name so the fact name could be same as the fact type. After we migrated the data to 5.3 we got the IllegalArgumentException: object is not an instance of declaring class. Is it possible to fix the problem by converting the fact name to the 'Fact Type' with first character in lowercase during importing so the data is backward compatible? Thanks a lot, Jian From: Michael Anstis To: jian zhi ; Rules Users List Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [rules-users] Fwd: Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to 5.3Final This is fine. 5.2 onwards groups columns for the same pattern together - if you looked at the DRL fo 5.0 you'd have seen the columns are effectively grouped together too. For example; given the following 5.0 configuration (taken from what you describe you have done):- Pattern $a : Column A - Condition 1 Pattern $b : Column B - Condition 1 Pattern $c : Column C - Condition 1 Pattern $d : Column D - Condition 1 Pattern $a : Column E - Condition 2 Pattern $b : Column F - Condition 2 5.0 DRL $a : Pattern( Condition 1, Condition 2 ) $b : Pattern( Condition 1, Condition 2 ) $c : Pattern( Condition 1 ) $d : Pattern( Condition 1 ) Importing this into 5.3 groups the columns:- Pattern $a : Column A - Condition 1 Pattern $a : Column B - Condition 2 Pattern $b : Column C - Condition 1 Pattern $b : Column D - Condition 2 Pattern $c : Column E - Condition 1 Pattern $d : Column F - Condition 1 5.2 DRL $a : Pattern( Condition 1, Condition 2 ) $b : Pattern( Condition 1, Condition 2 ) $c : Pattern( Condition 1 ) $d : Pattern( Condition 1 ) Furthermore, at the request of the community, the behavior of "default values" changed so that the are only the default value for a new row (5.2 onwards) and not the value used for an empty cell (5.0). I know this has caused some re-work for people migrating a legacy decision table from 5.0 to 5.2 but since the impact, to date, has been small I do not plan on making any programmatic changes. With kind regards, Mike 2012/2/13 jian zhi Mike, > > > >Thanks for the detail explanation. > > > >I found that the order of the conditions were changed again after I added two >more conditions to the same package I used last time. >I added default value to the first two conditions. Added the fifth condition >by using the binding name created for the first condition.Add the sixth >condition by using the binding name created for the second condition. After I >import the data to 5.3 the fifth condition became the second and the sixth condition became the fourth. Also the default value for the first and second conditions are not listed in the rule source in 5.3. Could you please take a look? I attach the modified repository in the email. > > >Thanks a lot, >Jian > > > > > From: Michael Anstis >To: drools-user >Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:59 PM >Subject: [rules-users] Fwd: Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to >5.3Final > > > >I suspect ConsumerAccountAssociationFact.hasAnyAccountClosed is a boolean. > > >In 5.3 we handle data-types better than 5.0, so String, Numbers, Dates are >Booleans have editors appropriate for the data-type and the resulting DRL only >escapes values with quotation marks where needed (i.e. Strings and Dates). >Boolean's in the table are now shown as Checkboxes. If the value is "true" it >is ticked, if the value is "false" the checkbox is not ticked. > >I don't therefore believe there is any problem. > > > >On 10 February 2012 16:35, jian zhi wrote: > >Mike, >> >> >> >>Thanks for the quick response. I downloaded the war and tested the fix. The >>order of the conditions are correct now. There is still a small problem in >>the last condition. >> >> >>In Drools 5.0 the source is consumerAccount : ConsumerAccountAssociationFact( >>hasAnyAccountClosed == "false" ). >>In Drools 5.3 the source is consumerAccount : ConsumerAccountAssociationFact( >>hasAnyAccountClosed == false ). It displays a square check box in the cell. >> >> >>Could you please take a look? >>Thanks, >>Jian >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Michael Anstis >>To: jian zhi ; Rules Users List >> >>Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2012 4:55 AM >> >>Subject: Re: [rules-users] Migrating repository data from Drools 5.0 to >>5.3Final >> >> >> >>You can get a build containing the fix from Nexus: >> >>https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/index.html#nexus-search;gav~org.drools~guvnor-webapp~5.3.2-SNAPSHOT~~ >> >> >>2012/2/8 jian zhi >> >>Mike, >>> >>> >>>Is it possible to release a patch of 5.3? >>> >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Jian >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Michael Anstis >>>To: Rules Users List >>>Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2012 3:17 AM >>
Re: [rules-users] Problem deploying 5.3.0 drools server in Tomcat
I found this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6349424/apache-cxf-rs-extensions-issue-in-2-4-0 so in my camel-server.xml I removed: and now I can at least start up. :) ken. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Problem-deploying-5-3-0-drools-server-in-Tomcat-tp3722323p3745379.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] [planner] Semi-locked planning entities
Thank you very much!!! can you help me with this problem plz : http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/uninitialized-planning-value-error-td3743831.html http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/uninitialized-planning-value-error-td3743831.html -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Semi-locked-planning-entities-tp3743318p3745938.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] Failed to get rules from Guvor after apply Security using Tomcat and JAAS
Dear Rules Users,
Previously, I use guvnor with no security.
Now, my boss wants me to apply security on guvnor.
The way I implement is use this link
http://ngjweb.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/drools-guvnor-manage-access-part-2/
which is using realm of tomcat and create a table is the system for guvnor
user.
I tested from browser, the security is working fine even more than 10 users
access concurrently.
But when my application access the guvnor and try to create the knowledge
base. It's becoming intermittent.
After several time access the guvnor, the guvnor is hang/can not access
even from browser.
Here is the exception I got
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.io.IOException: Server returned HTTP
response code: 401 for URL:
http://localhost:9090/guvnor/org.drools.guvnor.Guvnor/package/com.rbtsb.tm.meter/meter-internet/Dro
pCDR-LocalcallWithBRemarks.drl
at
org.drools.compiler.PackageBuilder.addKnowledgeResource(PackageBuilder.java:692)
at
org.drools.builder.impl.KnowledgeBuilderImpl.add(KnowledgeBuilderImpl.java:37
The way our app access the guvnor after apply security is as below.
Snipped Code
UrlResource urlResource = (UrlResource)
ResourceFactory.newUrlResource(ruleUrl);
urlResource.setBasicAuthentication("enabled");
urlResource.setUsername("admin");
urlResource.setPassword("admin");
builder.add(urlResource,ResourceType.DRL);
--
Mujoko
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mujoko
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Fwd: Re: Guvnor - expected value of a list
Try =[test1,test1] Toni On Feb 15, 2012, at 9:47 AM, Michael Anstis wrote: > > sent on the move > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: "Péter Gombás" > Date: 15 Feb 2012 07:40 > Subject: Re: [rules-users] Guvnor - expected value of a list > To: > > Hello Michael, > > yes, it is a Test scenario in Guvnor. In attachment is a very simple > project. Target is to check the resulting list. On the picture you can > see the problem: altough expected values are the same as target the > test is not succesful. Or am i using it not correctly? > > Peter > > 2012/2/14 Michael Anstis : > > I assume this is a QA \ Test Scenario in Guvnor? > > > > It's going to be helpful if you can provide an export of your repository (or > > an extract) showing the issue. > > > > > > On 14 February 2012 16:12, gombasp wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have the following problem: i would like to compare a value in expected > >> section of a Guvnor test. Guvnor says actual value is: > >> > >> (Actual: [test1, test1]) > >> > >> When i enter [test1, test1] to the expected value it will not match with > >> actual. > >> Is it possible to compare list values? If yes, what is the syntax? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Peter > >> > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Guvnor-expected-value-of-a-list-tp3744129p3744129.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 > > > > > > -- > Gombás Péter > ___ > 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
