[rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
Greg Barton
greg_barton at yahoo.com
Tue May 18 17:20:20 EDT 2010
Loading the rules each time is the culprit, if that's what's happening for each CDR. I'll try mocking up 40k generated rules that are comparable in complexity to the ones you've presented just to confirm, but I'd wager the reloading is the cause.
--- On Tue, 5/18/10, Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br> wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br>
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 4:11 PM
Greg,
CDR is a Call Detail Record, sorry I forgot to explain it, the object is
a POJO with the following attributes:
field: name: datereference type: DATE value: 2010-04-28 00:00:00.0
field: name: billingid type: STRING value: 20100428.15544.42adf
field: name: accountid type: INTEGER value: 15544
field: name: billingperiod type: STRING value: 20100401
field: name: billingclassification type: STRING value: DUR
field: name: ipxcallguid type: STRING value:
5k692927-guwtka-g8kj8d0u-1-g8krry54-o4n
field: name: transactiondatetime type: DATE value: 2010-04-28
20:21:01.337
field: name: billingitemid type: INTEGER value: 0
field: name: ratesystem type: STRING value: IPXNET
field: name: originnumber type: STRING value:
551135880520 at bitcompany.braste
field: name: destinationnumber type: STRING value: 551139012650
field: name: destinationareaid type: STRING value: 100000551
field: name: chargedduration type: DATE value: 1980-01-01 00:02:06.0
field: name: chargedamount type: FLOAT value: 0.0816
field: name: userid type: INTEGER value: 3372
field: name: username type: STRING value: bitcom51
field: name: unitamount type: FLOAT value: 0.00389
field: name: amountcurrency type: STRING value: USD
field: name: timezone type: INTEGER value: -3
field: name: registertype type: STRING value: MV
field: name: datelastupdated type: DATE value: 2010-04-29 02:57:18.54
field: name: lastupdatedby type: STRING value: IPXRateCalls rev032
field: name: lastupdateremarks type: STRING value: null
field: name: dateinserted type: DATE value: 2010-04-29 02:57:18.54
field: name: destinationdetail type: STRING value: SAO PAULO
field: name: type type: STRING value: Fixo
field: name: collectedcallflag type: INTEGER value: 0
field: name: jb_timestamp type: DATE value: null
field: name: digit0 type: INTEGER value: 5
field: name: digit1 type: INTEGER value: 5
field: name: digit2 type: INTEGER value: 1
field: name: digit3 type: INTEGER value: 1
field: name: digit4 type: INTEGER value: 3
field: name: digit5 type: INTEGER value: 9
field: name: digit6 type: INTEGER value: 0
field: name: digit7 type: INTEGER value: 1
field: name: digit8 type: INTEGER value: 2
field: name: digit9 type: INTEGER value: 6
field: name: digit10 type: INTEGER value: 5
field: name: digit11 type: INTEGER value: 0
This spreadsheet is only a sample because the whole one has 40000 rules, I'm checking the Jbilling code, but it seams to be loading the rules each time.
Best regards,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
2010/5/18 Greg Barton <greg_barton at yahoo.com>
OK, so a few questions:
What is a CDR? How much data does it contain? Do you load the rules fresh each time you process one? Are there other rules besides the ones listed in the decision table?
--- On Tue, 5/18/10, Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br> wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br>
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 9:49 AM
Dear All,
I've finished the tests with the digit per digit comparison without eval, but the performance does not increased a lot, it still taking about 1 minute per CDR,
that is so slow for a Telecom Carrier, follow a piece of the new spreadsheet below:
RuleSet
pricing
Sequencial
true
RuleTable Padrao
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
CONDITION
ACTION
PRIORITY
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingField
PricingManager
manager
salience
name
digit0 == '$param'
name
digit1 == '$param'
name
digit2 == '$param'
name
digit3 == '$param'
name
digit4 == '$param'
name
digit5 == '$param'
name
digit6 == '$param'
name
digit7 == '$param'
name
digit8 == '$param'
name
digit9 == '$param'
name
digit10 == '$param'
name
digit11 == '$param'
itemId
setPrice($param)
Campo
Digito1
Campo
Digito2
Campo
Digito3
Campo
Digito4
Campo
Digito5
Campo
Digito6
Campo
Digito7
Campo
Digito8
Campo
Digito9
Campo
Digito10
Campo
Digito11
Campo
Digito12
ID do Item
Preço
Ordem
digit0
5
digit1
5
digit2
9
digit3
9
digit4
3
digit5
2
digit6
6
digit7
3
digit8
1
digit9
0
digit10
0
digit11
9
300
0.32610
1
digit0
5
digit1
5
digit2
9
digit3
8
digit4
3
digit5
2
digit6
6
digit7
3
digit8
5
digit9
0
digit10
8
digit11
9
300
0.32610
2
digit0
5
digit1
5
digit2
9
digit3
8
digit4
3
digit5
2
digit6
6
digit7
3
digit8
5
digit9
0
digit10
8
digit11
8
300
0.32610
3
digit0
5
digit1
5
digit2
9
digit3
8
digit4
3
digit5
2
digit6
6
digit7
3
digit8
5
digit9
0
digit10
8
digit11
7
300
0.32610
4
digit0
5
digit1
5
digit2
9
digit3
8
digit4
3
digit5
2
digit6
6
digit7
2
digit8
5
digit9
0
digit10
0
digit11
6
300
0.32610
5
Do i need to make some special treatment to get Drools indexing my rules? I'm using the guvnor to upload the spreadsheet and compile the rules.
Does anybody have some tips to increase the performance?
Thank you very much,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
2010/5/17 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells at nds.com>
My advice is to try just having a single column:
strValue matches “$param.*”
you could also compare the performance of that to
eval(strValue.startsWith(“$param”))
Also presumably you are only wanting the first matching rule in your table to fire, looking at the table below drools will fire all of the matching rules,
this will mean than any phone number with prefix 5511 will be charged at 0.4 as that will be the last rule to fire.
Thomas
From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org]
On Behalf Of Greg Barton
Sent: 14 May 2010 20:59
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
No problem. I'm not sure how you'd do this in a decision table (it's probably pretty trivial) but in DRL you'd do:
rule "makePhoneNumber"
when
s: String()
then
insert(new PhoneNumber(s));
retract(s);
end
With two caveats:
1) you need some conditions on the String matched if there are other Strings that don't make PhoneNumbers.
2) The rule could use a salience value higher than the pricing rules, but that isn't necessary.
Actually, there's a third caveat, and it's a big one: this won't work with sequential mode. This is because the rule above would alter working memory with the expectation that the pricing rules would react to the change. If you want to use sequential mode
you'll have to convert to PhoneNumber objects before hand. I understand that you're using this Jbilling package, but is there no way you can put an intermediate adapter between the two? It'd be as simple as inserting "new PhoneNumber(someString)" instead
of "someString".
--- On Fri, 5/14/10, Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br> wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio at voicetechnology.com.br>
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 2:16 PM
Dear Greg,
Thanks very much for your reply.
I'm using sequential mode = true
Is there a way to create this PhoneNumber class, and convert the String to the PhoneNumber object inside the Drools? Because I'm using a system called JBilling and it send the phoneNumber as a String.
Sorry if those are basic questions, but I'm a newbie in Drools...
Thank you very much,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
2010/5/14 Greg Barton <greg_barton at yahoo.com>
Right off the bat I'd say try to get rid of the eval usage. Can you put the phone number into an object like this:
class PhoneNumber {
private char digit0;
private char digit1;
///...same for the rest of the digits
public char getDigit0() { return digit0; }
public char getDigit1() { return digit1; }
}
Then the conditions would look like this:
digit0 == '$param'
Behind the scenes hopefully this will optimize better. The use of eval won't optimize well.
Are you using sequential mode? This might be a good candidate for that if setting the price does not trigger any other rules to fire.
--- On Fri, 5/14/10, Antonio Anderson Souza <antonioams at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza <antonioams at gmail.com>
Subject: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Drools Users Mailing list" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 1:28 PM
Dear All,
I'm deploying a JBilling using Drools in a Telecom Carrier in Brazil, and I'm using Decision tables in xls files to execute the pricing, my pricing table has about 40.000 rules, and I'm getting a terrible performance
about 1.5 minute to execute the price of each CDR (Call Detail Record) mediated.
Follow bellow a small piece of my decision table:
RuleTable Padrao
CONDITION
CONDITION
ACTION
PRIORITY
PricingField
PricingManager
manager
salience
name
eval (strValue.charAt(0) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(1) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(2) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(3) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(4) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(5) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(6) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(7) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(8) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(9) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(10) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(11) == '$param')
itemId
setPrice($param)
Campo
Digito1
Digito2
Digito3
Digito4
Digito5
Digito6
Digito7
Digito8
Digito9
Digito10
Digito11
Digito12
ID do Item
Preço
Ordem
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
8
300
0.00000
1
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
7
300
0.00000
2
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
6
300
0.00000
3
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
5
300
0.00000
4
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
4
300
0.00000
5
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
3
300
0.00000
6
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
2
300
0.00000
7
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
300
0.40000
8
Is it normal? Are there somebody using Jbilling in a similar way? Does anybody can help me?
Best regards,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
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
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the postmaster at nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data
may be monitored by NDS for employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
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
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100518/4cf22284/attachment.html
More information about the rules-users
mailing list