Re: [rules-users] GC Overhead Limit Exceeded and 1B JoinLeftNode Objects

On 24/02/2013, Julian Klein <julianklein(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: "366\\.\\d+|743\\.\\d?" [Hmm, words like "first" and "second" imply two distinct events, so they can't be "the same". You may have a mess in your data so that there could be two reports (!) of the *same* visit.] I'd say it's a "get-your-specs-cleansed" issue. Consider the rule (after eliminating the useless binding of Inspector and some simplifications): when $sv1 : SiteVisit( yearRecorded == durationCycleYear, !annualVisit ) FaultCode( svID == $sv1.ID, code matches "366.12" ) $sv2 : SiteVisit( yearRecorded == durationCycleYear, !annualVisit, inspectorID == $sv1.inspectorID ) // ensure same Inspector FaultCode( svID == $sv2.ID, code matches "45.61" ) then Now, not knowing how SiteVisit and FaultCode can be related, I can only guess that possible data could be: (1) SiteVisit( 2013, "13/42", false ) // year, ID, annualVisit FaultCode( 366.12, "13/42" ) SiteVisit( 2013, "13/55", false ) FaultCode( 45.61, "13/55" ) Two distinct visits, fires once. (2) SiteVisit( 2013, "13/42", false ) FaultCode( 366.12, "13/42" ) FaultCode( 45.61, "13/42" ) There is only one visit, but fires once nonetheless. (3) SiteVisit( 2013, "13/42", false ) FaultCode( 366.12, "13/42" ) FaultCode( 45.61, "13/42" ) SiteVisit( 2013, "13/55", false ) FaultCode( 366.12, "13/55" ) FaultCode( 45.61, "13/55" ) Two visits, fires twice. It's possible that multiple FaultCodes per SiteVisit aren't possible, but the data model (AFAIK) suggests otherwise, and if this is so, you should be prepared for every possible situation. I can't imagine handling all three situations adequately with this single rule. No, it is definitely not "data cleansing" - it is an issue of writing rules well. (Sorry for the harsh wording.) -W