Re: [rules-users] modifying the problem facts while running the solver - Drools Planner
by ge0ffrey
spinjala wrote
>
> Once the solver finds that a workorder (WO1) couldn't be assigned to any
> resource in the list of resources (due to the constraints), it simply
> picks up the 1st resource in the list with highest hard score and assigns
> it (even though this assignment breaks all constraints). My question is,
> why is it generating a solution by assigning the wrong resource to the
> workorder instead of say, throwing a message saying this workorder cannot
> be assigned to a resource or something like that. In my opinion, a solver
> should generate a solution only when it is possible to generate but not
> just assign something that has highest score. I may be wrong but would
> really appreciate if you can help here, i am unable to proceed further in
> evaluating this product for my project.
>
Planner perceives an planning variable with the planning value as being
"uninitialized", not as "unassigned". This is due to
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3317
Add a planning value resource that represents "unassigned". Then add a hard
constraint rule that gets trigged if something is assigned to that planning
value. Give a lower weight than 2 entities being assigned to the same value
and make the 2 entities being assigned to the same value not trigger if they
are assigned to that "unassigned" value.
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/modifying-the-problem-facts-while-runni...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 years, 10 months
Maps as Object in Drools
by Frank Wilson
Hi All,
I was reading the following thread from august 2009:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/2009-August/010178.html
I would like write a clojure DSL for drools similar to what André was
trying to do and I also feel that using maps as fact-objects would be the
most idiomatic for Clojure (at least in the general case!).
I am interested by the idea of implementing ObjectType and Accessor
interfaces proposed by Edson. It seems that this would be a good fit with
Drools and that (if understand correctly!) it would allow the map
properties to be properly indexed by the rules engine. However I cannot
seem to find these interfaces (ObjectType and *Accessor) in the current API.
http://docs.jboss.org/drools/release/5.4.0.CR1/knowledge-api-javadoc/inde...
Could someone show me where these classes are documented? Or were they
moved or replaced? Maybe there is some source code that would make a good
example?
Thanks for your help,
Frank
13 years, 10 months
How to execute knowledeg base remotely?
by jasonxzhong
In Guvnor 5.4.0 manual it states
/Service Config is a special asset that defines an execution service
configuration. This execution service is a war file (generated automatically
by the editor) which you can deploy to execute KnowledgeBases remotely for
any sort of client application./
This is very interesting from the point of integration as we have both JVM
and .NET based solutions. However even though the manual explains in details
how to create a service config asset and deploy it, I cannot find any
reference as how the service interface is exposed (REST, SOAP?) and any
description of the definition of the remote APIs that can be invoked by a
client application.
Maybe I missed something...
Jason
-----
Jason
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-execute-knowledeg-base-remotely-...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 years, 10 months
Re: [rules-users] modifying the problem facts while running the solver - Drools Planner
by Garf
spinjala wrote
>
> THis is what is happening now with my sample solution that I am writing..
> Once the solver finds that a workorder (WO1) couldn't be assigned to any
> resource in the list of resources (due to the constraints)...
Well, it's a slightly different problem them. Planner's approach is to solve
problems in parallel, where it's not trivial to determine where a given item
can be matched.
Part of the motivation beyond using Planner is that whether one item fits
may be dependent on how the other items are arranged.
If workorders are coming in one at a time, why not apply the rules to that
item alone -- and that remove it from the planning scenario if it can't be
fit?
Jon
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/modifying-the-problem-facts-while-runni...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 years, 10 months
A few general questions on scaling StatefulKnowledgeSessions
by Skiddlebop
Greetings All!
I humbly request your guidance and insights!
Overview:
We are currently undergoing evaluation of how to best proceed using the
Drools Suite to best meet the current and future business needs with the
highest system scalability and performance. We are attempting to make the
proper system design choices, particularly with respect to which of the two
KnowledgeSession types (stateful or stateless) to use and how to best use
them to scale the system.
The Context: We are using Drools for operational decision making,
monitoring, and workforce resource management; this naturally entails some
degree of event processing, temporal reasoning, state management, and
inference.
Given the nature of this context, it seems that a StatefulKnowledgeSession
is justified and best (but may not be entirely necessary).
The current approach:
Currently, our rule model is not very mature or stable... Consequently, the
approach is to use one very large long-running StatefulKnowledgeSession
containing all relevant operational data. This single
StatefulKnowledgeSession will be constructed and disposed of (and
reconstructed with operational state) on a very infrequent interval, say
every 24 hours. In this fashion, a single working memory network manages the
entire operational state and holds all relevant facts; Each fact is updated
on a per-event basis.
The problem:
This approach has many drawbacks in my opinion... I'll mention just a few...
StatefulSessions are not thread-safe (require sequential processing) and
consequently will not scale; it is also a single point of failure. Also, as
the size of Working Memory grows, processing time increases and garbage
collection becomes very messy and laggy (when performed).
The potential solution:
To enable greater scalability, differentiation, and parallelization, it
seems wise to partition the rules/facts into multiple specialized
concurrently operating StatefulKnowledgeSession (KnowledgeBase) instances.
However, if done improperly, this poses a difficult problem as with greater
separation, the more myopic our reasoning becomes.
Questions (some of which are intentionally dumb):
Given the nature of the above mentioned business context, does a Stateful
approach seem justified (or is it advised to follow KISS and remain
stateless)?
What are the recommended strategies to best scale StatefulKnowledgeSessions
(or a set of StatefulKnowledgeSessions) as they are inherently
single-threaded?
If multiple StatefulKnowledgeSessions/KnowledgeBases are used, what are the
recommended strategies to partition/individualize/classify them? Should we
do this according to type, instance value, unique identifier, group of
interrelated objects, etc? I understand this is very domain/use-case
specific, but I'm curious how others approach this matter.
What are the recommended strategies with respect to frequency (or triggers)
of disposal of a StatefulKnowledgeSession and/or the retraction of the facts
therein?
What would you say a healthy average working-memory size is?
What would you say the average lifespan/duration of a
StatefulKnowledgeSession is?
If we have an external data store (which holds state) from which we can
query and reconstruct working-memory state for any given object (or set of
objects), would it be best to continue with the single large
StatefulKnowledgeSession approach?
Also, If we can always reconstruct state, is there any material difference
(capability-wise) between a Stateful and Stateless KnowledgeSession besides
inference/iterative decision making? Is it possible to do Temporal
Reasoning/CEP with a StatelessKnowledgeSession (I think not)?
I entirely understand that most of this is very context specific, and that
no one else can solution this on my behalf; Some of these questions may be
very obtuse... However, I'd sincerely appreciate any insights from this
righteously authoritative community.
With Humility and Gratitude,
Skiddlebop
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/A-few-general-questions-on-scaling-Stat...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 years, 10 months
Add attachement file to a Task Form
by Sadiroveski
Hello,
I am using Drools generated form to build my application forms with JBPM. In
a specific user task inside my process, I want to let the user add a file
via an upload button. So the question is:
- How can we do this in the Task form and in the task properties in the
designer?
- Does the file should be stored in a directory or in the database?
- Can we store the file in a document management system like "Sharepoint"?
Best Regards,
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Add-attachement-file-to-a-Task-Form-tp4...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 years, 10 months
