I would like to create a rule with lamba expression like below:
when
rule_id: String() from "784acba8-32e5-41de-bd73-04f9ce2bfaff"
$: DroolsEventWrapper(Arrays.stream("testing".split("")).filter(element->(element!=null && element.contains("e"))).findFirst().isPresent())
then
System.out.println("Qualified for "+rule_id);
end
just a simple check "testing" will be given as a parameter also; however when I use it drl. It gave error like:
mismatched input '.' in rule "784acba8-32e5-41de-bd73-04f9ce2bfaff" in pattern
When I check the location of that dot; it belongs to filter(element->(element!=null && element.contains("e"))) when I omit it, it is working.
I am using the latest version of Drools: 7.55.0.Final. I found some tickets which say that lambda expressions somehow buggy at previous versions but not the latest ones.
Do I missing something, or is there any way to run this within DRL ?
Related
rule "attaching AV and impact rating"
agenda-group "evaluate likelihood"
dialect "java"
when
Application($threatList:getThreatList())
$av:AttackVector()
exists $threat:Application.Threats(impact == "Disclose Information")from $threatList
exists AttackVector($av == AttackVector.REQUEST_MANIPULATION)
then
RiskRating riskRating=new RiskRating($threat.getImpactRating(),$av.getLikelihood(),$av.getName());
insertLogical(riskRating);
end
I am working on getting the object $threat in THEN part of the above-mentioned rule. If I run the above rule, it says:
Rule Compilation error : [Rule name='attaching AV and impact rating']
referee/security/attack/Rule_attaching_AV_and_impact_rating1426933818.java (7:1053) : $threat cannot be resolved
If I loop through it and get the value in the THEN part, it causes a CARTESIAN product and inserts the values a number of times in the session. My rule looks like this when I get the cartesian product.
rule "attaching AV and impact rating"
agenda-group "evaluate likelihood"
dialect "java"
when
Application($threatList:getThreatList())
$av:AttackVector()
exists $threat:Application.Threats(impact == "Disclose Information")from $threatList
$threat:Application.Threats(impact == "Disclose Information")from $threatList
exists AttackVector($av == AttackVector.REQUEST_MANIPULATION)
then
RiskRating riskRating=new RiskRating($threat.getImpactRating(),$av.getLikelihood(),$av.getName());
insertLogical(riskRating);
end
How do I get the value of $threat in THEN part without having the cartesian product?
Remove the exists operation entirely.
rule "attaching AV and impact rating"
agenda-group "evaluate likelihood"
dialect "java"
when
Application($threatList:getThreatList())
$av: AttackVector()
$threat: Application.Threats(impact == "Disclose Information")from $threatList
exists(AttackVector($av == AttackVector.REQUEST_MANIPULATION))
then
RiskRating riskRating=new RiskRating($threat.getImpactRating(),$av.getLikelihood(),$av.getName());
insertLogical(riskRating);
end
exists means "there is a thing in working memory that matches these conditions/looks like this". It's not used to actually extract or provide a reference to that matching instance. Simply remove the operator and it works as you need -- if there is an Application.Threats that matches your conditions, the rule triggers and the matching value is assigned to the $threat variable.
What you're running into is the fact that you have multiple threats that mean your condition, which is why you're having multiple triggers of the rule -- it will trigger once per matching Application.Threats. The exists keyword mitigates this because it only cares that at least one match exists, but you don't get a reference (because if there's four matches which one will be assigned to the variable? it doesn't make sense, logically.)
So you need to change your rule so that it won't fire multiple times and will instead only fire once when it finds a match. Usually you'd do this by making the consequences do something to working memory that makes the rule no longer eligible to be fired. In your example, you insert a RiskRating object; you could, then, check that no risk rating exists in your conditions:
not( RiskRating( /* insert criteria here or leave empty */ ) )
Alternatively you could retract something from working memory that your rule relies on to be present or a match. For example, if you don't need it for anything later on, you could retract the attack vector:
retract( $av )
Yet another option might be to try and update your getThreatList() implementation to return a Set instead so you don't have duplicates (assuming threats are considered duplicates based on the 'impact' field.) Or you could try to remove all Application.Threats instances that match the criteria from the threatlist being returned.
We simply don't know enough about your use case or rule set to know what data you need or what it looks like, but at the end of the day you simply need the rule to fire once and only once, so to do this you need to somehow update the rule to know that it's no longer valid.
Using Kapacitor 1.3 and I am trying to use the following where node to keep measurements with an empty tag. Nothing is passing through and I get the same result with ==''.
| where(lambda: 'process-cpu__process-name' =~ /^$/)
I can workaround this issue using a default value for missing tags and filter on this default tag, in the following node but I am wondering if there is a better way structure the initial where statement and avoid an extra node.
| default()
.tag('process-cpu__process-name','system')
| where(lambda: \"process-cpu__process-name\" == 'system' )
Sure it doesn't pass, 'cause this
'process-cpu__process-name'
is a string literal it TICKScript, not a reference to a field, which is
"process-cpu__process-name"
You obviously got the condition always false in this case.
Quite common mistake though, especially for someone with previous experience with the languages that tolerates both single & double quote for mere string. :-)
Also, there's a function in TICKScript lambda called strLength(), find the doc here, please.
I have a Python script that runs a pgSQL file through SQLAlchemy's connection.execute function. Here's the block of code in Python:
results = pg_conn.execute(sql_cmd, beg_date = datetime.date(2015,4,1), end_date = datetime.date(2015,4,30))
And here's one of the areas where the variable gets inputted in my SQL:
WHERE
( dv.date >= %(beg_date)s AND
dv.date <= %(end_date)s)
When I run this, I get a cryptic python error:
sqlalchemy.exc.ProgrammingError: (psycopg2.ProgrammingError) argument formats can't be mixed
…followed by a huge dump of the offending SQL query. I've run this exact code with the same variable convention before. Why isn't it working this time?
I encountered a similar issue as Nikhil. I have a query with LIKE clauses which worked until I modified it to include a bind variable, at which point I received the following error:
DatabaseError: Execution failed on sql '...': argument formats can't be mixed
The solution is not to give up on the LIKE clause. That would be pretty crazy if psycopg2 simply didn't permit LIKE clauses. Rather, we can escape the literal % with %%. For example, the following query:
SELECT *
FROM people
WHERE start_date > %(beg_date)s
AND name LIKE 'John%';
would need to be modified to:
SELECT *
FROM people
WHERE start_date > %(beg_date)s
AND name LIKE 'John%%';
More details in the pscopg2 docs: http://initd.org/psycopg/docs/usage.html#passing-parameters-to-sql-queries
As it turned out, I had used a SQL LIKE operator in the new SQL query, and the % operand was messing with Python's escaping capability. For instance:
dv.device LIKE 'iPhone%' or
dv.device LIKE '%Phone'
Another answer offered a way to un-escape and re-escape, which I felt would add unnecessary complexity to otherwise simple code. Instead, I used pgSQL's ability to handle regex to modify the SQL query itself. This changed the above portion of the query to:
dv.device ~ E'iPhone.*' or
dv.device ~ E'.*Phone$'
So for others: you may need to change your LIKE operators to regex '~' to get it to work. Just remember that it'll be WAY slower for large queries. (More info here.)
For me it's turn out I have % in sql comment
/* Any future change in the testing size will not require
a change here... even if we do a 100% test
*/
This works fine:
/* Any future change in the testing size will not require
a change here... even if we do a 100pct test
*/
I have a makefile with the following format. First I define what my outputs are;
EXEFILES = myexe1.exe myexe2.exe
Then I define what the dependencies are for those outputs;
myexe1.exe : myobj1.obj
myexe2.exe : myobj2.obj
Then I have some macros that define extra dependencies for linking;
DEP_myexe1 = lib1.lib lib2.lib
DEP_myexe2 = lib3.lib lib4.lib
Then I have the target for transforming .obj to .exe;
$(EXEFILES):
$(LINK) -OUT:"Exe\$#" -ADDOBJ:"Obj\$<" -IMPLIB:$($($(DEP_$*)):%=Lib\\%)
What I want to happen is (example for myexe1.exe)
DEP_$* -> DEP_myexe1
$(DEP_myexe1) -> lib1.lib lib2.lib
$(lib1.lib lib2.lib:%=Lib\\%) -> Lib\lib1.lib Lib\lib2.lib
Unfortunately this is not working. When I run make --just-print, the -IMPLIB: arguments are empty. However, if I run $(warning DEP_$*) I get
DEP_myexe1
And when I run $(warning $(DEP_myexe1)) I get
lib1.lib lib2.lib
So for some reason, make does not like the combination of $(DEP_$*). Perhaps it cannot resolve macro names dynamically like this. What can I do to get this to work? Is there an alternative?
Where does $(warning DEP_$*) give you DEP_myexe1 as output exactly? Because given your makefile above it shouldn't.
$* is the stem of the target pattern that matched. In your case, because you have explicit target names, you have no patten match and so no stem and so $* is always empty.
Additionally, you are attempting a few too many expansions. You are expanding $* to get myexe1 directly (assuming for the moment that variable works the way you intended). You then prefix that with DEP_ and used $(DEP_$*) to get the lib1.lib lib2.lib. You then expand that result $($(DEP_$*)) and then expand that (empty) result again (to do your substitution) $($($(DEP_$*)):%=Lib\\%).
You want to either use $(#:.exe=) instead of $* in your rule body or use %.exe as your target and then use $* to get myexe1/myexe2.
You then want to drop two levels of expansion from $($($(DEP_$*)):%=Lib\\%) and use $(DEP_$*:%=Lib\\%) instead.
So (assuming you use the pattern rule) you end up with:
%.exe:
$(LINK) -OUT:"Exe\$#" -ADDOBJ:"Obj\$<" -IMPLIB:$(DEP_$*:%=Lib\\%)
I managed to get it working without needing to resolve macros in the way described above. I modified the linking dependencies like this;
myexe1.exe : myobj1.obj lib1.lib lib2.lib
myexe2.exe : myobj2.obj lib3.lib lib4.lib
Then I need to filter these files by extension in the target recipe;
$(EXEFILES):
$(LINK) -OUT:"$(EXE_PATH)\$#" -ADDOBJ:$(patsubst %, Obj\\%, $(filter %.obj, $^)) -IMPLIB:$(patsubst %, Lib\\%, $(filter %.lib, $^))
The $(pathsubst ...) is used to prepend the path that the relevant files are in.
In the case of myexe1.exe, the link command expands to;
slink -OUT:"Exe\myexe1.exe" -ADDOBJ: Obj\myexe1.obj -IMPLIB: Lib\lib1.lib Lib\lib2.lib
Out of interest's sake, I would still like to know if it is possible to resolve macro names like in the question.
Is it possible to reuse a when/condition statement into another when/condition statement in a DSL file?
For example, I have two conditions:
[condition][]The client is invalid = Client( name == null || email == null )
[condition][]All the clients are invalid = forall( Client( name == null || email == null ) )
Note that the second condition just diff the first for the forall command, but the statement inside is equals. In these case, I want to reuse the first condition into the second.
Is it possible? How?
Thank you.
even the most recent version of drools will only let you substitute values into a template from pojo's or a corresponding map as per their documentation here.
This won't work for your use case though.
Since drool files are simply text files, there is nothing preventing you from considering a more powerful templating toolkit.
Possibilities include Apache Velocity, ANTLR or Scala!