Le 09/04/2014 11:20, Maxime Falaize a écrit :

I confirm that the multithreaded rules evaluation is not currently supported. See https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools/blob/master/drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/core/RuleBaseConfiguration.java#L683

2014-04-07 12:27 GMT+02:00 Maxime Falaize <maxime.falaize@gmail.com>:

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are talking about. In this article, there is nothing about multithreaded rules evaluation. It just says that the Phreak algorithm is designed for thread safety and future multicore processors exploitation. It doesn't mean that it is already multithreaded. Moreover I tested my appliciation with and without multithreaded sessions (I am using Drools 6.0.1.Final) and I noted a faster execution in the multithreaded one.

2014-04-04 13:53 GMT+02:00 jmercier <jmercier@genoscope.cns.fr>:

Le 04/03/2014 09:55, Maxime Falaize a écrit :

> Hello,
>
> I want to ask you if it is a good practive to pool stateful sessions
> for a specific ruleset to improve the execution performance.
> Actually in my application I execute my rules by calling SOAP
> webservice. For performance purpose, I test multithreaded calls to my
> webservice and I noted that when I pool sessions in the server side,
> it improves the performance a lot.
>
> To pool sessions, I just declare multiple ksession tag in my
> kmodule.xml :
>
> <kbase name="KBase" packages="com.example.*">
>         <ksession name="KSession1"/>
>          <ksession name="KSession2"/>
>         <ksession name="KSession3"/>
>         <ksession name="KSession4"/>
>         <ksession name="KSession5"/>
>  </kbase>
>
> In my spring webservice endpoint I just put that code to handle the
> pool :
>
> @Endpoint
> public class ExampleEndpoint implements InitializingBean {
>
>     @Autowired
>     private ExampleRuleService ruleService;
>      private Map<Integer, Boolean> isRunningMap = new
> HashMap<Integer, Boolean>();
>     private static final int NB_POOL_SESSIONS = 5;
>
>     @PayloadRoot(localPart = "com.example.ExampleRequest")
>      @ResponsePayload
>     public ExampleResponse handleRequest(
>             @RequestPayload ExampleRequest request) throws
> InterruptedException {
>         KieServices ks = KieServices.Factory.get();
>         KieContainer kc = ks.getKieClasspathContainer();
>          while (true) {
>             for (int i = 0; i < NB_POOL_SESSIONS; i++) {
>                 boolean run = false;
>
>                 synchronized (isRunningMap) {
>                     if (!isRunningMap.get(i)) {
>                          isRunningMap.put(i, true);
>                         run = true;
>                     }
>                 }
>
>                 if (run) {
>                     KieSession ksession = kc.newKieSession("KSession"
> + (i + 1));
>                      ExampleResponse response =
> ruleService.run(ksession, request);
>                     ksession.dispose();
>
>                     isRunningMap.put(i, false);
>                     return response;
>                  }
>             }
>             Thread.sleep(100);
>         }
>     }
>
>     public void afterPropertiesSet() throws Exception {
>         for (int i = 1; i <= NB_POOL_SESSIONS; i++) {
>             isRunningMap.put((i - 1), false);
>          }
>     }
>
> }
>
> It works well because in my benchmark I improve 5 times the
> performance (as I have 5 different threads) but I wondered if it is a
> good practice and if it does not hide any issues that I could have in
> the future.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> --
> Maxime FALAIZE

> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


Hi maxime,

I do not remember if use drools 6 or drools 5. If you using drools 6.
Phreaks algorithm use multi threading according to use 'from
accummulate' far i understand here:
http://planet.jboss.org/post/drools_6_performance_with_the_phreak_algorithm

Instead to put a thread by ksession here rules evaluation are
multi-threaded.


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

--
Maxime FALAIZE

--
Maxime FALAIZE

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

Ah yes. Maybe Mark Proktor could tell  some information about this

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