ce to test 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
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 java.util.Date
you paste test case you're using
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
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 CronTr
I tested it with both cron and interval
> 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-tp4028947p4029
:
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
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 wrote:
> We are still working on this, we’ve found a number of related points,
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 wrote:
> Mario has found an issue at a sync
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.
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools/bl
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
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-inconsistencies-at-increasing-event-throughputs-tp4028947p4028955.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archi
Wolfgang,
thanks for the prompt reply. Inline comments.
On 25 March 2014 09:12, Wolfgang Laun 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 rule with a repeating o
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 haqu
13 matches
Mail list logo
