2010/8/11 Edson Tirelli <tirelli(a)post.com>:
Hi Wolfgang,
I believe both suggestions (mine and yours) are equivalent, just
different ways of writing down the solution for the problem. If you identify
any significant difference in the results, please let me know... :)
No, both will produce the sums required to decide >X, but both were
incomplete w.r.t. what (I think) is meant by "grouping by customer".
-W
Edson
2010/8/11 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>
> 2010/8/11 Edson Tirelli <tirelli(a)post.com>:
> >
> > "Group by" is implicit in rules, just by writing patterns in
order.
> > So,
> > if you write a rule that starts with Customer(), it will automatically
> > do a
> > "group by" customer:
> > when
> > Customer(...)
> > ...
> > then
>
> Hmm, I think vijrams meant "grouping of the accumulated sums" which will
> require the PurchaseSum facts I proposed. Only then it is possible to
> obtain
> all sums-per-day grouped by customer.
>
> I don't see why "customers that purchased more than 100 on a given
date"
> should fire in Customer order.
>
> Even with my solution some additional quirks will be necessary to get
> the data grouped by Customer.
>
> -W
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @
www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users