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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
  