[rules-dev] Re: [rules-users] Max packages
Joe White wrote:
Mark, thank you very much for your help, it is greatly appreciated.
"There are improvements we can make to generated code into a single
class and use a switch statement to invoke the correct part, but we
don't have time for that right now, so would need to come from the
community."
I would be interested in doing this work if someone can point me in
the right direction on where to start.
look for the *.mvel templates in drools-compiler you'll see how we
generate the code. Then look at all the various java builders, like
JavaConsequenceBuilder and you'll see how we construct it. compiled code
is done in two places. We first generate an invoker class which
implements the interface, like the Consequence interface and then we
genernate the code to be executed which is called via the invoker. It
needs to be two as the needed parameters for the java consequence to
execute differer (different number of vars) so the invokers job is to
match the needed interfaces and adapt/bridge to calling to the actual
consequence/eval/predicate. We currently generate all the
consequence/eval/predicate in a single class per rule, but we have a
class per invoker.
So we now need invoker apis, like Consequence, to take an int so it can
use a switch statement to which allows multiple invocations to be
generated into the same file. An idea solution will take a configuration
on teh granularity that people want - to what we have now right up to
putting everything into a single file for the entire package.
I also would be interested in doing the work to allow drools to
reference multiple levels of inner classes.
This is done and fixed in 4.0.x and trunk - we just haven't released any
binaries wit hteh fix.
Our work would benefit from both pieces of functionality. I'll move
this to the developer list, but would appreciate if somebody
knowledgeable could show me where to get started on the code necessary
to generate to a single class.
I've cc'd this into the dev mailing list, so please when you reply do so
to just that mailing list.
Thanks,
Joe
*From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Proctor
*Sent:* Wednesday, August 13, 2008 2:53 AM
*To:* Rules Users List
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Max packages
Joe White wrote:
Can someone help me understand the relationship between the number of
Packages in a single RuleBase and PermGen memory consumption? I have a
test that generates 200 rules and then adds those rules as different
packages to a single rule base. PermGen consumption grows near
linearly with the addition of Packages to the rule base and on a
default PermGen setting the JVM runs out of PermGen after about 120
packages.
It's not related to Packages, it's related to the number of rules and
whether those rules have compiled java parts - like the consequence,
eval etc - each one adds an additional class.
Is every new Package and RuleBase backed by a set of generated
Classes? Is there a way to get around the amount of class generation
that is taking place?
The test has been run against Drools 5.
You can use MVEL, which has no class generation. There are
improvements we can make to generated code into a single class and use
a switch statement to invoke the correct part, but we don't have time
for that right now, so would need to come from the community.
Thank you for your help,
Joe
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 10.1 KB)