8:38 a.m.
I've been experimenting with ruleflows and in particular parallel execution. According
to the documentation an AND split
"means that the control flow will continue in all outgoing connections
simultaneously".
I've been unable to demonstrate this. All my rules in one branch always execute before
the rules on the other branch (I have an AND join joining these branches again).
Is this the expected behaviour or am I doing something wrong?
/Steven
9:45 a.m.
Parallel rule execution in a RuleFlowSteven,
It depends on what kind of activities you are trying to execute in each of your branches.
The AND-split will not assign different threads to each of the branches, but trigger the
outgoing branches one after the other. However, this results in parallelism when one of
the branches contains wait states. For example, if I add two parallel human tasks in my
flow, the and split will first create the first task and not wait for its completion but
also trigger the creation of the second task. At that point, both tasks are executing in
parallel.
So parallel execution will occur if you execute your work asynchronously (using work
items) or have wait states (like an event wait or timer node). And we recommend users to
use asynchronous work items to execute actions that are not instantaneous but might take
some time to process.
Kris
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Hale
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 3:38 PM
Subject: [rules-users] Parallel rule execution in a RuleFlow
I've been experimenting with ruleflows and in particular parallel execution.
According to the documentation an AND split
"means that the control flow will continue in all outgoing connections
simultaneously".
I've been unable to demonstrate this. All my rules in one branch always execute
before the rules on the other branch (I have an AND join joining these branches again).
Is this the expected behaviour or am I doing something wrong?
/Steven
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
1:36 a.m.
Thanks Kris. After reading the documentation I had been expecting and hoping for threading
in parallel branches. I gather that asynchronous work items are a new feature in version
5. They look like they will provide what we are looking for.
/Steven
-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org on behalf of Kris Verlaenen
Sent: Thu 13/11/2008 16:45
It depends on what kind of activities you are trying to execute in each of your
branches. The AND-split will not assign different threads to each of the branches, but
trigger the outgoing branches one after the other. However, this results in parallelism
when one of the branches contains wait states. For example, if I add two parallel human
tasks in my flow, the and split will first create the first task and not wait for its
completion but also trigger the creation of the second task. At that point, both tasks
are executing in parallel.
So parallel execution will occur if you execute your work asynchronously (using work
items) or have wait states (like an event wait or timer node). And we recommend users
to use asynchronous work items to execute actions that are not instantaneous but might
take some time to process.
Kris
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Hale
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 3:38 PM
Subject: [rules-users] Parallel rule execution in a RuleFlow
I've been experimenting with ruleflows and in particular parallel execution.
According to the documentation an AND split
"means that the control flow will continue in all outgoing connections
simultaneously".
I've been unable to demonstrate this. All my rules in one branch always execute
before the rules on the other branch (I have an AND join joining these branches again).
Is this the expected behaviour or am I doing something wrong?
/Steven
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:14 a.m.
I've been unable to demonstrate this. All my rules in one branch
always execute before the rules on the other branch (I have an AND
join joining these branches again).
I attached a simple example using an AND-split and two ruleset nodes,
where you will notice that rule 2 is executed before rule 1, because
they are both activated at the same time (in parallel) but the salience
of rule2 is higher, so it is executed first.
Kris
10:33 a.m.
Thank you Kris, This is helpful.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Kris Verlaenen <
Kris.Verlaenen(a)cs.kuleuven.be> wrote:
> I've been unable to demonstrate this. All my rules in one
branch
> always execute before the rules on the other branch (I have an AND
> join joining these branches again).
I attached a simple example using an AND-split and two ruleset nodes,
where you will notice that rule 2 is executed before rule 1, because
they are both activated at the same time (in parallel) but the salience
of rule2 is higher, so it is executed first.
Kris
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
5857
days inactive
5858
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Kris Verlaenen -
Kris Verlaenen
-
Michal Bali -
Steven Hale