Hi,

Thanks for the replies. I'm actually working with a big number of large rule sets (ranging from 100 rules to up to 3000), which are generated based on another proprietary language. These are not used system wide, but on a user per user basis and loaded dynamically

In itself, the system handles itself well, as compiled packages are persisted on disk and loaded only when a user requires it. Thing is, the memory footprint (and the size of the persisted packages) has increased significantly when migrating from 4.0.7 to 5.4.0.Final (20% to 30% for the large ones) and I am trying to find ways of trimming this down as much as I can.

Going from a package name of 12 characters to 1 actually and rule names to 3-4 characters shaved off 5-10% in most cases, so not so trivial :-)

Unfortunately, reducing the number of rules is not a option in my case, so any advice (or explanation on the increase) is most welcome

> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 01:42:47 -0700
> From: dsotty@gmail.com
> To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org
> Subject: Re: [rules-users] Package footprint
>
> I agree with Wolfgang... can you give us an idea of the rules you are working
> with?
> Actually:
> - using shorter names might be a last-resort, unless you were using really
> long names in the first place
> - do not use redundant code is a good practice anyway!
> - agreed, evals are evils :)
> - changing the DialectConfigurations is absolutely dangerous, do that at
> your own risk :)
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Package-footprint-tp4019721p4019735.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users