firstly, do you have an actual performance issue, and are you sure you
have well written rules?
From my findings the contributed Leaps algorithm was not more efficient
than Rete in most use cases.
There is currently no way to "emulate" sequential with what we have,
atleast you wouldn't get an additional performance gains. However we
would be very interested if someone wanted to find a way to "configure"
our rete implementation for sequentail execution.
Regards
Mark
Shahad Ahmed wrote:
Does anyone know if there's an efficient way of replicating the
Ilog
JRules sequential algorithm in Drools?
From a (over simplified) users perspective, the JRules sequential
algorithm takes an ordered list of rules and fires the first rule in
the sequence with a valid IF condition. You can also specify a maximum
number of rules in a sequence that may fire. If you have a large
number of simple rules to be fired in sequence (often precondition
validating rules in a complex ruleflow), then the sequential algorithm
gives a significant performance gain over the RETE algorithm in JRules.
I can see how you might order a set of rules by salience and give then
the same agenda group. Then I assume you will get the equivalent
"behaviour" to the Ilog sequential algorithm described above. However,
before I try this out, I thought I'd ask if anyone has a view on the
performance of this approach; and whether there would be anything to
be gained by adding a similar sequential algorithm to Drools.
I've seen a few Blog posts in the past that suggest that the Ilog
sequential algorithm is similar to LEAPS, but I don't know if that's
accurate - also LEAPS will no longer be supported on Drools 4.0
development path.
Thanks
Shahad
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users