[rules-users] Found solution vs actual optimum [planner]

[Geoffrey De Smet]

Looks normal, no big bottleneck apparently.

It's probably time to blame the hardware :)
   http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
Mine's around 4k there.


Keep in mind that: better hardware will give you the same solution twice 
as fast,
but not necessarily a much better solution in the same time (which 
better algorithms do tend to do).

Op 12-02-13 00:18, john poole schreef:
> I went through and ran some stepLimit benchmarks, commenting out single rules
> at a time, or groups of rules that were dependent on each other. "average
> calculate count per second" stayed fairly consistent at around 825 to 850,
> except for the "consecutive working day" rules.( Which were already in the
> drl file before I added mine, but do apply to the schedules I'm working on)
> I commented out the group, then uncommented them in sequence.
>
> Everything below a score is commented out:
>
> 1487(entire group commented out)
> rule "insertEmployeeConsecutiveAssignmentStart"
> 1308
> rule "insertEmployeeConsecutiveAssignmentEnd"
> 1244
> rule "insertEmployeeWorkSequence"
> 1054
> rule "minimumConsecutiveWorkingDays"
> 1081
> rule "maximumConsecutiveWorkingDays"
> 988
> rule "insertEmployeeFreeSequence"
> 994
> rule "insertFirstEmployeeFreeSequence"
> 902
> rule "insertLastEmployeeFreeSequence"
> 854
> rule "insertEntireEmployeeFreeSequence"
> 938
> rule "minimumConsecutiveFreeDays"
> 895
> rule "maximumConsecutiveFreeDays"
> 851 (nothing commented out)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Found-solution-vs-actual-optimum-tp4022027p4022223.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
>