I have not performed any tests on this, but I'm sure the Drools guys
could comment on it as they provide serialized vs non-serialized support
in the framework. I would have to think it would decrease
initialization time as you're only de-serializing objects vs compiling a
rule set. Of course, your build time will increase :)
Our main goal was to limit the number (and size) of the jars we had to
include in our application as we already had a very large distributable
for our application.
Some features of the compilation mojo:
- Precompiles drls, ruleflow, and dsl into their individual packages
- Supports single package being spread across multiple DRL and rule flow
files using same package name.
- Supports DSL through a specific naming convention (some work could be
done here to be a little more flexible)
- Supports compression to decrease serialized package file sizes
(Currently gzip, could tweak to support other compressions)
- Serializes via XStream (could be tweaked to support different
serialization mechanisms)
Eric
On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 16:57 +0100, Geoffrey De Smet wrote:
Sounds interesting.
Does it noticeably decrease RuleBase initialization time at runtime?
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
Eric Miles wrote:
> Is there a Maven Drools compilation mojo, provided either by the Drools
> team or some open source project? If not, I have one that I'd be
> willing to submit. I think it's pretty slick and would only require a
> few tweaks to truly make it useful (hard coded to currently use XStream
> serialization).
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://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