Re: [rules-users] New type of Score and solving time very hight

With kind regards, Geoffrey De Smet dmzpippo-drools(a)yahoo.it schreef: Nice :) Did you copy from DefaultHardAndSoftScore? I recommend to do that so the hashcode, equals etc are correct. I don't know if we want a build-in HardAndSoftScore based doubles in drools planner: - doubles are inherently rounding-prone (try adding 0.09 and 0.01) - BigDecimal is better, but slower Don't let it stop you from using it yourself though :) Feel free to make an issue anyway, so other can vote on it. If there are enough votes I'll add it anyway. All in all, the performance of the score doesn't matter that much. Because even though it does impact performance to not use ints (like 3%), premature optimization is the root of all evil. So use the score implementation which fits you best. 1) Do you have a StartingSolutionInitializer? Take a look at CurriculumCourseStartingSolutionInitializer. 2) Are you using relativeSelection? Those 2 are the 2 main ingredients for getting feasible solutions. It should definitly be able to get feasible solutions for this problem. Avoid a "score trap" (see manual). I prefer to use a time based termination criteria. Turn the log level on info, you should see a step occur between 1 or 2 seconds. Lower your relativeSelection if a step takes more then 2 seconds. I 'll implement absoluteSelection soon. Try the benchmarker. Soon the benchmarker will support a time VS bestscore graph as you can see in my devoxx movie: http://beta.parleys.com/#st=5&id=1714