We generate a lot more bytecode now, for improved performance execution. constraints start of being evaluated dynamically, as they were in 4.0.x, after they are executed a certain number of times we emit bytecode to allow JIT to provide improved execution times.

Mark


On 29/06/2012 08:19, Jean-Paul Shemali wrote:
Hi again all,

Am i the only one noting these issues on the version?
If this is not the right place to discuss this, could someone point me in the right direction (do I enter an issue in JIRA with potential patches, ...)?

Thanks in advance

> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 00:01:16 -0700
> From: jshemali@hotmail.com
> To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org
> Subject: [rules-users] Migrating from 4.0.7 to 5.4.0.Final
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm currently in the process of migrating an application using drools 4.0.7
> to 5.4.0.Final and I've stumbled into a few issues with the new version that
> I find disturbing:
>
> - Our unit tests failed because the JVM ran out of perm gen space, which
> looks odd as in 4.0.7 we've had quite a margin to start with.
> - Doing several Yourkit analysis, I finally find classloading leaks:
> * *org.drools.rule.builder.dialect.asm.ClassGenerator.EMPTY_METHOD_BODY*
> is a static instance which will hold to the last instance of
> InternalClassLoader created
> * *org.drools.rule.constraint.MvelConstraint* uses an ExecutorHolder that
> spawns daemon threads and keeps them in a pool. Problem is these threads
> create class loaders, and can only be garbage collected when the thread
> dies, meaning never in my case...
> - I've quick fixed both issues, the second one by simply disabling the
> thread pool.
> - Once this is done, the perm gen behaves correctly, but the execution times
> are 2-3 times slower on very large set of rules (~1000). Looking at Yourkit
> analysis again, I see that the number of classes generated and the perm gen
> consumption is about 3 times higher in 5.4.0.Final. I honestly don't know
> how to address this.
>
> I've tried to find some other posts concerning these issues, to no avail. I
> don't see any work around this, short of code changes, and for reducing the
> number of generated classes I simply have no idea.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong, any help would be greatly appreciated
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Migrating-from-4-0-7-to-5-4-0-Final-tp4018215.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


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