Re: [rules-users] Drools rule [Planner] - memory consumption scaling

Interesting benchmarks. These images would make an interesting blog post on how memory consumption scales in planner, if you're interested in writing one. I still don't understand why you start out with 1500MB already taken (before planner starts) if the engineers and workorder objects are so light. Is it running on a heavy app server? Op 30-01-13 16:23, André Fróes schreef: Would be this: [image: Imagem inline 2] i noticed 2 thing doing this test, 1st, the ID binded on workorder/engineer can be the same, for example, it will run if I have an workorder id 0 and an engineer id 0, and that it will run if provided time enough to do the comparison by the xml file, otherwise, it will present a result full of "null's". I generate the workorder/engineer this way: -------- List<Engineer> engineerList = new ArrayList<Engineer>(); for (int i = 1; i < 1001; i++){ engineerList.add(new Engineer(i, "engineer " + i, 8 )); } List<WorkOrder> workOrderList = new ArrayList<WorkOrder>(); for (int i = 1002; i < 3002; i++){ workOrderList.add(new WorkOrder(i, (new Random().nextInt(5-1+1)+1))); } ---------------- in order to stop receiving nulls, i increased the termination from 5s to 120s, and it worked ---------------- <termination> <maximumSecondsSpend>120</maximumSecondsSpend> </termination> ---------------- 2013/1/30 Geoffrey De Smet <ge0ffrey.spam(a)gmail.com&gt; > Now try 2000 workorders and 1000 engineers and see what it does ;-) > > Op 30-01-13 14:27, André Fróes schreef: > > Just to knowledge, i'm sending the graph of memory usage when running it > with, first marker(between first 2 green lines) peak with 10 workorders and > 5 engineers, and, secong marker (between last 2 green lines), 26 workordes > and 10 engineers. > [image: Imagem inline 1] > > > 2013/1/30 Geoffrey De Smet <ge0ffrey.spam(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> I wonder why it worked on the 5.5.0.Final with the cloudbalance but >> not with my workorder example that was much simpler, >> >> Me too. All the examples / unit tests work with 5.5.0.Final, but >> there's clearly a case they don't cover. >> Good thing is that 5.6 will be out soon. >> >> Op 30-01-13 13:30, André Fróes schreef: >> >> >> It worked with the 5.5.1-SNAPSHOT >> >> ----------------- >> 10:27:49.215 [main] INFO o.d.p.core.solver.DefaultSolver - Solving >> started: time spend (179), score (null), new best score (null), random seed >> (0). >> 10:27:49.254 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (0), time spend (224), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-15]). >> 10:27:49.256 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (1), time spend (225), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-14]). >> 10:27:49.284 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (2), time spend (254), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-13]). >> 10:27:49.293 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (3), time spend (263), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-12]). >> 10:27:49.297 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (4), time spend (267), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-11]). >> 10:27:49.300 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (5), time spend (270), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-10]). >> 10:27:49.306 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (6), time spend (276), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-9]). >> 10:27:49.310 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (7), time spend (280), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-8]). >> 10:27:49.315 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (8), time spend (285), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-7]). >> 10:27:49.321 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Step index (9), time spend (291), score (0hard/0soft), initialized planning >> entity ([WorkOrder-6]). >> 10:27:49.321 [main] INFO o.d.p.c.c.g.DefaultGreedyFitSolverPhase - >> Phase constructionHeuristic ended: step total (10), time spend (291), best >> score (0hard/0soft). >> 10:27:50.041 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (0), time spend (1010), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (1000/1000) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-8] <=> [WorkOrder-12]). >> 10:27:50.744 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (1), time spend (1714), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (1000/1422) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-14] <=> [WorkOrder-10]). >> 10:27:51.568 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (2), time spend (2538), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (1000/2013) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-6] <=> [WorkOrder-9]). >> 10:27:52.083 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (3), time spend (3053), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (1000/3635) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-11] <=> [WorkOrder-15]). >> 10:27:52.902 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (4), time spend (3872), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (1000/8864) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-7] <=> [WorkOrder-13]). >> 10:27:54.030 [main] DEBUG o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Step index (5), time spend (5000), score (0hard/0soft), best score >> (0hard/0soft), accepted/selected move count (0/31698) for picked step >> ([WorkOrder-15] <=> [WorkOrder-7]). >> 10:27:54.031 [main] INFO o.d.p.c.l.DefaultLocalSearchSolverPhase - >> Phase localSearch ended: step total (6), time spend (5001), best score >> (0hard/0soft). >> 10:27:54.031 [main] INFO o.d.p.core.solver.DefaultSolver - Solving >> ended: time spend (5001), best score (0hard/0soft), average calculate count >> per second (9730). >> >> Solved distribution with 10 work orders and 5 engineers: >> 6: ID: 5 - Monkey D. Ruffy >> 7: ID: 5 - Monkey D. Ruffy >> 8: ID: 4 - Mr. Miyagi >> 9: ID: 4 - Mr. Miyagi >> 10: ID: 3 - Rambo >> 11: ID: 3 - Rambo >> 12: ID: 2 - Chuck Norris >> 13: ID: 2 - Chuck Norris >> 14: ID: 1 - Aladin >> 15: ID: 1 - Aladin >> --------------- >> >> I wonder why it worked on the 5.5.0.Final with the cloudbalance but >> not with my workorder example that was much simpler, i mean, the rule was >> only a hard constraint and the pojo simples though. >> >> >> 2013/1/29 André Fróes <arfmoraes(a)gmail.com&gt; >> >>> Okay I'll try it now and then post the result. >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing listrules-users@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing listrules-users@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing listrules-users@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users