Please excuse my blind bias against globals, but isn't this what Querys are
there for?
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-expert/html_single/index.html#d0e5362
Gabor
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
I am using the knowledge session to get the objects created.
knowledgeSession.getObjects():
this will return all objects: the facts that were inserted into the engine
before fireAllRules(), plus the new facts created as result of the rule
execution.
Also you can use getQueryResults, or openLive
2011/1/31 Greg Barton
>
> Yes, the accumulate function itself should maintain the sort internally.
Which, in this case, means that the timestamp can't be in the
FactHandle, i.e., it must be a field of the class representing the
fact and set by code when the fact is inserted (or received in the
sy
Yes, the accumulate function itself should maintain the sort internally.
@OlliSee : See the thread titled "How to write a rule that fires when it
matches against specific facts in working memory."
--- On Sun, 1/30/11, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
From: Wolfgang Laun
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Writing a
Hi!
How can I use escalation for human task?
I mean that if the task was not completed in a time - it will be escalated
to another user?
I didn't find property deadline or escalation in human task!
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Using-esca
Thanks Wolfgang.
Edson
2011/1/30 Wolfgang Laun
> I created JBRULES-2881 and noted the possibility of it being related to
> 2862 (where there is a comment from you, Edson, which seems to fit).
>
> -W
>
>
> 2011/1/30 Edson Tirelli
>
>
>>This must be a bug. It should match only the late
Not just activations. The famous Tokens of Rete referring to facts matching
this or that pattern constraint are all over this network.
-W
2011/1/30 yj h
> I see. Thank you.
> For instance, retracting a fact with lots of pending activations associated
> with this fact could me expensive. Am I rig
I created JBRULES-2881 and noted the possibility of it being related to 2862
(where there is a comment from you, Edson, which seems to fit).
-W
2011/1/30 Edson Tirelli
>
>This must be a bug. It should match only the latest event of each type.
> Would you please open a JIRA specifically wit
On 30 January 2011 12:55, OlliSee wrote:
>
> @Wolfgang: I guess you are referring to the list I use. Of course I expect
> them to be ordered by timestamp.
>
You sure do, but the question is whether you get them in this order during
processing by accumulate. There is no documentation that accumu
This must be a bug. It should match only the latest event of each type.
Would you please open a JIRA specifically with your description of the
problem and let me know?
Thanks,
Edson
2011/1/29 OlliSee
>
> Hey again everyone,
>
> I seem to be having another problem.
>
> When I have a
I see. Thank you.
For instance, retracting a fact with lots of pending activations associated
with this fact could me expensive. Am I right?
2011/1/27 Esteban Aliverti
> Sessions are cheap to create.
> The problem of removing all the facts and then insert new ones is that
> depending on you rule
Hi.
The company I work for is evaluating drools for use in an event analysis
engine, to be based on drools fusion, and I was tasked with evaluating
Drools for that purpose. I've read a couple of books that deal with drools,
in addition to various articles, guides, and tutorials, but could not fin
@Greg: Could you hand me a link to that discussion?
@Wolfgang: I guess you are referring to the list I use. Of course I expect
them to be ordered by timestamp.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Writing-a-pattern-in-which-each-event-constraint-d
I just added this as a comment to JBRULES-2862:
Given an event sequence A, A, B,..., the
rule AB
when
A() over window:length(1)
B() over window:length(1)
then ... end
pairs the last B with *each* A, whereas the rule
rule AB
when
B() over window:length(1)
A() over window:length(1)
t
14 matches
Mail list logo
