[rules-users] Slow compilation (4h) for a single rule

[fx242]

Thanks for your explanation Edson, it makes sense now I think!
Basically what you are saying is that there is a limit, beyond which is no
longer feasible to use more ORs on a rule.


Edson Tirelli-4 wrote
> 
> You are trying to avoid the issue. As reported by others, your
> conditions should be inside the patterns, not in "or'd" evals in the end,
> and yes, it is possible to generate rules like that in an automated
> program.
> 

Sadly I don't see how, as some of my rules have arbitrary arithmetic
involving more than one variable inside the Number(), for more context see
the example I've put on
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/drools-arithmetics-without-eval-td3823232.html.

For this case I think I will try to invert the logic and get rid of the ORs:
not(A or B) => not(A) and not(B).

Best regards,
TL




--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Slow-compilation-4h-for-a-single-rule-tp4018855p4018894.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.