[rules-dev] Re: [rules-users] determinism with rulebase partitioning
Sorry I meant to ask this on th dev list :(
Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
Hi Mark,
A few questions:-
(A) What does "parallel evaluation of a rulebase" mean? Is it designed
to optimise, for example, two threads processing a stateless and
stateful session?
It works out the parts of the network that can be isolated, so we can
use multiple threads in parallel for evalation of a rulebase.
(B) Are there only two partitions, both of which are invisible to
the
user? Is there any value in allowing user-defined partitions?
There could be any number of partitions depending on the analysis of the
rulebase. It's an internal optimisation of a rulebase, so it's not
something they are aware of. A user cannot define a partition, as
partitions are determined by the rules written and their level of isolation.
(C) Does the partition used depend upon what type of session is used
(i.e. stateless always uses the partition without an agenda whereas
stateful always uses the partition with an agenda)?
it analysesthe rulebase, nothing to do with the session type. However
stateless sessions without inference typically don't need determinstic
execution, so we can just evaluate and fire there.
(D) Can a rule sometimes be deterministic and sometimes not (i.e.
depends upon the type of session)?
Not on the type of session, no. And having a rule sometimes determinstic
would probably be bad.
Cheers,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Mark Proctor
Sent: 01 August 2008 07:05
To: Rules Users List
Subject: [rules-users] determinism with rulebase partitioning
We have rulebase partitioning almost working, this allows parallel
evaluation of a rulebase. For stateless lessions with no agenda this
will allow for much faster executions, where you don't care about
deterministic execution. However for deterministic execution its more
complicated. The current plan is to have an agenda per parition, which
means that we no longer have rulebase wide deterministic execution
order, only with the partition itself. The user is unlikely to be aware
of the created partitions, so won't be aware of the unditermistic
behavour of their rulebase. Anyone have any input on mechanisms users
can do to help the rulebase know what needs to be executed
deterministically and what doesn't?
Mark
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)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