R: [rules-users] Performance of JBoss Rules

[Dandrea Francesco]

>From what I read on the list you were waiting for MVEL to work against 1.4 to release M1, which is a beta of the upcoming JBoss Rules 3.2. Is this correct?
If the release date of M1 is not to far I can surely re-execute the test against that release.
For my evaluation: do you have a roadmap/release schedule for JBoss Rules 3.2? (We don't want to run a production system on beta or unreleased code)
 
Thanks a lot for your answer :)

 

________________________________

	Da: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] Per conto di Mark Proctor
	Inviato: venerdì 26 gennaio 2007 17.09
	A: Rules Users List
	Oggetto: Re: [rules-users] Performance of JBoss Rules
	
	
	Dandrea,
	
	I believe that MVEL has just got stable for JDK1.4 so we should be doing an M1 release which is much much much faster than 3.0.x - it should be backards compatible, any chance you could re-run those tests when M1 is out?
	
	Thanks
	
	Mark
	Dandrea Francesco wrote: 

		Hi all,
		I have to evaluate if JBoss Rules is a viable solution in this scenario:
		We have to monitor a large network using performance alarms. These alarms arrive every 15 minutes. We don't know the real rate, but peaks of many tens of thousands of alarms every 15 minutes must be managed in a timely way.
		We want to use JBoss Rules to correlate these alarms, in order to show less higher level  alarms to the users .
		We have basically 2 use cases:
		1) I have to correlate the alarms on a single node of the network. (for example in node A I have 2 alarms of different severity about the connection with node B, so I aggregate everything in a third alarm saying "I cannot connect to node B from node A"). In this scenario I have many workingMemories (one for each node) and not so many facts for each working memory. The performance of JBossRules is very very good (almost linear with the number of nodes)
		2) I have to correlate alarms among the nodes. (for example all nodes connecting with a node A have an alarm "I cannot connect to node A from node ...", I want to create an alarm "The node A is unreachable").
		In this scenario I'm very worried about the performance of JBoss Rules, as I prepared a test case (in attachment) and I inferred that the growth is highly non linear on the number of the facts. Is this performance data wrong? Am I doing something stupid? Can someone comment?
		 
		Here are the numbers (The numbers are not so important, but rate they grows is)
		 
		
Number of Facts	 Time to assert alla the new allarms (seconds)	 Time to modify the alarms to close them (seconds)	 Total	
1000	 1.735	 0.969	 2.704	
2000	 5.875	 3.000	 8.875	
3000	 12.281	 6.406	 18.687	
4000	 23.672	 11.672	 35.344	
6000	 52.282	 23.250	 75.532	
8000	 87.188	 42.532	 129.720	
12000	 200.767	 94.642	 295.409	
16000	 360.909	 176.579	 537.488	
20000	 518.019	 263.158	 781.177	
		 
		Or in a graph:
		 
		 
		 
		Thanks a lot for your interest.
		 
		 
		--------------------------------------------------------------------
		CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
		This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
		above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
		the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
		is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
		the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by
		replying to webmaster at telecomitalia.it <mailto:webmaster at telecomitalia.it> .
		        Thank you
		                                        www.telecomitalia.it <http://www.telecomitalia.it> 
		--------------------------------------------------------------------
		
________________________________


		_______________________________________________
		rules-users mailing list
		rules-users at lists.jboss.org
		https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
		  


--------------------------------------------------------------------

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by replying to webmaster at telecomitalia.it.

        Thank you

                                        www.telecomitalia.it

--------------------------------------------------------------------
                        
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070126/040c9855/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 7625 bytes
Desc: ATT1569402.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070126/040c9855/attachment.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 5713 bytes
Desc: ATT1569403.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070126/040c9855/attachment-0001.png