Mark,
Agreed that Manners needs improvement. In it's current form, it's nearly
useless as a comparative benchmark. You might want to check with Charles
Young, if he's not on the list, who did a very through analysis of Manners a
while back and may have some ideas.
Whilst on the topic, I am interested in any other benchmarking ideas that
folks may have. We're in the process of putting together (hopefully)
comprehensive set of benchmarks for performance testing.
Cheers,
- Steve
On 28/03/09 5:06 AM, "Mark Proctor" <mproctor(a)codehaus.org> wrote:
I was wondering if anyone fancied having a go at improving Miss
Manners
to make it harder and less easy to cheat. The problem with manners at
the moment is that it computes a large cross product, of which only one
rule fires and the other activations are cancelled. What many engines do
now is abuse the test by not calculating the full cross product and thus
not doing all the work.
Mannsers is explained here:
https://hudson.jboss.org/hudson/job/drools/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/t...
target/docs/drools-expert/html/ch09.html#d0e7455
So I was thinking that first the amounts of data needs to be increased
from say 128 guests to 512 guests. Then the problem needs to be made
harder, and the full conflict set needs to be forced to be evalated. So
maybe the first assign_seating rule is as normal where it just finds M/F
pairs with same hobbies, but additionally we should have a scoring
process so that those matched in the first phase then each must have
some compatability score calculated against them and then the one with
the best score is picked. Maybe people have other ways to improve the
complexity of the test, both in adding more rules and more complex rules
and more data.
Mark
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
Level 40
140 William Street
Melbourne, VIC 3000
Australia
Phone: +61 3 9607 8287
Mobile: +61 4 0096 4240
Fax: +61 3 9607 8282
http://illation.com.au