[rules-users] RE: fact base storage?

[Evans, Jess]

Thanks.  That's the plan.  However, my assumption is that even if the
data model and rules support partitioning that you still need to
synchronize calls to working memory so that two threads aren't invoking
insert, fire*, retract, etc. at the same time.

-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Greg Barton
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 6:13 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: RE: [rules-users] RE: fact base storage?

That model sounds quite reasonable.  You may also find it useful to
partition your rules by user by having them match on a User object of
some kind and user state that matches up with each User.  

rule
when
  $u : User();
  UserState(user == $u);
  ImmutableFact1(...)
  ImmutableFact2(...)
then
  ...
end

That way you could have multiple users being processed concurrently and
they wouldn't overlap.

--- On Thu, 10/9/08, Evans, Jess <JEvans at collegeboard.org> wrote:

> From: Evans, Jess <JEvans at collegeboard.org>
> Subject: RE: [rules-users] RE: fact base storage?
> To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
> Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008, 4:32 PM Thanks for the confirmation.

> I think it should be straightforward to implement a parser as you 
> suggest to populate a list of java beans and assert them to the 
> working memory.  I'm just surprised that this doesn't already exist.
>  
> May I ask how you manage the working memory?  It looks like you can't 
> clone or snapshot a working memory.  So, you must either assert all 
> the default facts in a new working memory for every user 
> session/request or use a shared synchronized working memory.  I'm 
> building a web based wizard calculator with around 10k default 
> immutable facts.
> It's taking
> almost 800ms to assert and fire to reach an initial state, so I'm 
> planning on sharing one synchronized session.  Is this a reasonable 
> approach or am I off my rocker?
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> -Jess
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
> [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Vikrant 
> Yagnick
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 2:45 PM
> To: Rules Users List
> Subject: [rules-users] RE: fact base storage?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Jess,
> 
>  
> 
> I am facing the same problem right now. While, I do not know of any 
> OOTB ways to do this, I initially implemented an all rule solution.
> 
> In my case, I had a lookup table that based on a age or gender got a 
> rate or some value.
> 
>  
> 
> Using some Excel Trickery, I got the 2 dimensional table into  one 
> dimensional columns of the type:
> 
> Age Gender   Value
> 
> Age and Gender became conditions and Value became the Action.
> 
>  
> 
> In your case, you could form a column with a dummy LHS(1=1) and keep 
> all the columns as Action Columns.
> 
> In each Action Column you could build up your Fact.
> 
>  
> 
> For Example you could do the following:
> 
>  
> 
> Fact{ int a; int b;
> 
> }
> 
> Condition                        Action               
> Action
> 
> F: Fact
> 
>                                         f.set($1);         
>   f.set($1)
> 
> Eval(true)                        Col A                 
> Col B
> 
> Dummy Value                 <values for a>   
> <values for b>
> 
>  
> 
> If you generate a rule base out of this, it should load your tables 
> straight as facts.
> 
>  
> 
> However, do note, that I did some rather Q&D benchmarks for this and 
> soon realized that the rulebase size and memory usage was getting 
> really large. (Especially the PermGen Size).
> 
>  
> 
> You may want to have a look at the memory usage, in case you need to 
> load a large number of tables. Due, to the above(and other reasons), I

> just wrote a custom parser using JXL (The same Excel Library Drools 
> uses for Parsing Excels). It is really neat and would make a simple 
> solution.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> In, case you get another solution do post it to the list.
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Vikrant
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
> [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Evans, Jess
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:54 PM
> To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> Subject: [rules-users] fact base storage?
> 
>  
> 
> I'm trying to come up to speed on the drools capabilities.  I see that

> drools supports loading rules from a decision table in a spreadsheet.

> I have a set of conversion tables that I'd like to represent as facts 
> asserted when the rule base has been loaded, but before processing 
> user requests.  I could always model lookup tables in a database, but 
> I'd rather not have to build the CRUD interface to manage them.
>  I'd rather
> represent them so that each row in a spreadsheet represents a fact 
> (based upon a predefined java bean).  Of course, I could custom 
> implement this functionality.  However, I was wondering if drools 
> supports some OOTB means of loading facts from Excel or other 
> resource?
> 
>  
> 
> thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> -Jess
> 
>  
> 
> 	
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MASTEK LTD.
> Mastek is in NASSCOM's 'India Top 20' Software Service Exporters List.
> In the US, we're called MAJESCOMASTEK
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual and not 
> that of Mastek Limited, unless specifically indicated to that effect.
> Mastek Limited does not accept any responsibility or liability for it.
> This e-mail and attachments (if any) transmitted with it are 
> confidential and/or privileged and solely for the use of the intended 
> person or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, 
> re-transmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action

> in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than 
> the intended recipient is prohibited. This e-mail and its attachments 
> have been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. It is the 
> responsibility of the recipient to run the virus check on e-mails and 
> attachments before opening them. If you have received this e-mail in 
> error, kindly delete this e-mail from desktop and server.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 	
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


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