[rules-users] Package footprint

[Wolfgang Laun]

Most of these "optimizations" look very desparate to me; most likely
they are motivated by a very large number of rules. Perhaps some
techniques for reducing this number would show greater benefit.

-W

On 13/09/2012, JP Chemali <jshemali at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to reduce the memory footprint of packages in my application
> (for
> performance reasons they are dynamically loaded from disk), and I was
> wondering if some of you had any experience with the subject?
>
> So far the optimizations that I can come up with in 5.4.0.Final version are
> all about reducing the sizes of generated classes:
> - Package name in the drl file should be as small as possible, one letter
> is
> best (even better that no package at all)
> - Rule name should be as small as possible as it is used to generate the
> consequence class name
> - Write as less code as possible in the consequence
> - Use as few as possible eval statements
> - By using my own JavaDialectConfiguration and MVELDialectConfiguration
> when
> building the knowledge, I can remove the random number on class names that
> was added in the recent versions (don't understand why it was added in the
> first place? Does anyone know?)
>
> I see some leeway to shorten the names of the following generated classes
> but the amount of overriding to change the "default" consequence name and
> the suffixes is a bit too exotic for me:
> - <PackageName>.<RuleName>DefaultConsequenceInvoker
> - <PackageName>.<RuleName>DefaultConsequenceInvokerGenerated
>
> Any advice, other leads some of you might have?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Package-footprint-tp4019721.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
>