If you do need to work with a stateful session, you shouldn't need to 'isolate' any data as such. You can insert facts relating to all users into working memory and then include the user ID on a request when you insert it into working memory. That way, you just need your rules to have constraints that match a user fact to some other fact on which you're making decisions. Treat it a bit like a join in a database. You keep data relating to all your users in the database, but when you query the database, you join/filter on the user ID, or some other relevant key.

On 14 Feb 2013, at 16:27, Tim Slonaker <tslonaker+drools@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello all,

I am new to drools. My company is looking into switching from a commercial rule engine to drools. Our existing codebase is .net not Java. We are trying to integrate drools into our existing .net application by calling into a drools-server using it’s restful interface.

Our current rule engine only works in a stateless mode so I am trying to figure out how to get drools-server to work in a stateless mode. I have posted before that I have been having difficulty using a stateless session with ruleflows (http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Ruleflow-not-working-with-stateless-session-in-drools-server-5-5-0-Final-td4021624.html). I have noticed that the stateful sessions seem to work fine as far as ruleflows are concerned. I am wondering if I can use a stateful session instead of stateless.

Our application could have 100s of unique users per minute. The rule engine provides a unique decision for each user based on their specific data. So, each user’s data / facts should be isolated. There can’t be any data sharing between users, that would make the rule engine decisions invalid. How would I configure a stateful session to work in this scenario? Is it possible?

Thanks,
Tim S.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users