[rules-users] mixing activation-group and ruleflow-group

[Wolfgang Laun]

I think that my solution inhibits the creation of useless (i.e., to be
removed later) Recommendation facts, which ought to be better than
creating all and removing the superseded ones later (as I think your
latest rule set does).

Expressing preference though data is "cleaner" than using salience.
Consider  what happens if the order of preference changes: you'd have
to rewrite rules (salience); I just change the creation of my Superior
facts. Also, I think I need less rules, which is always good. - But
only a benchmark with representative data is decisive.

-W

On 04/10/2012, raffi <christian.koehler at s2008.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> As suspected the way of showing the output was not optimal. I now get the
> objects with a query, as you said:
> query "recomms"
>    recomm    : Recommendation()
> end
>
> And it shows that my currently solution is working in the way it should. My
> inserting rules now look like this:
> rule "pets"
> 	salience 20
> 	activation-group "categories"
>     when
>         $tr 	: Translog($trpid : pid)
>         $p		: Product(pid == $trpid, $pid : pid, $price : price, $brand :
> brand)
>         $pcat	: ProductCategory(pid == $pid, $cid : cid)
>         $cat	: Category(cid == $cid, cname == "pets", $cname : cname)
>     then
>         insert(new Recommendation($pid, $price, $brand, $cname));
> end
>
> rule "food"
> 	salience 20
>     activation-group "categories"
>     when
>         $tr 	: Translog($trpid : pid)
>         $p		: Product(pid == $trpid, $pid : pid, $price : price, $brand :
> brand)
>         $pcat	: ProductCategory(pid == $pid, $cid : cid)
>         $cat	: Category(cid == $cid, cname == "food", $cname : cname)
>         not Recommendation(cname == "pets")
>     then
>        	insert(new Recommendation($pid, $price, $brand, $cname));
> end
> ...
>
> After all transaction data was read in I call the remove rules in a
> descending order:
> rule "remove everything except pets"
> 	salience 19
> 	when
> 		exists Recommendation(cname == "pets")
> 		$recomm	: Recommendation(cname == "food" || cname == "vegetable" || cname
> == "drinks")
> 	then
> 		retract($recomm);
> end
>
> rule "remove everything except food"
> 	salience 18
> 	when
> 		exists Recommendation(cname == "food")
> 		$recomm	: Recommendation(cname == "vegetable" || cname == "drinks")
> 	then
> 		retract($recomm);
> end
> ...
>
> I think there is space for optimization.
> Is there a huge speed advantage in your solution laune in comparison to
> mine
> (because I have far more rules) in case of lets say 10.000 master data
> facts
> in working memory?
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/mixing-activation-group-and-ruleflow-group-tp4020058p4020128.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>