[rules-users] Preventing re-evaluation on modification of 'output' fact

We're building a fraud detection application that uses rules to analyze orders and the buyers and recipients on those orders. As rules fire, they modify an 'output' fact, which is an object whose only intent is to record the results as rules fire. It's not used in the LHS of any rules other than to get a handle to it, e.g.: rule "Rule 001 - Operator Flagged" enabled (FraudRuleEvaluationHelper.isRuleEnabled("Rule 001 - Operator Flagged")) ruleflow-group "orderAnalysis" lock-on-active when $order: OrderFact(operatorFlagged==true) $results: FraudResultsDTO() then modify($results) { addOrderSuspectReason("O") }; FraudRuleConsequenceHelper.logRuleFiring($order.getOrderId(), "001"); end We're finding that as the number of facts increases, the processing team increases dramatically and I'm wondering if modifying the output fact the way we do causes the rules to get re-evaluated to see if any activations should be created or cancelled. Would removing the modify block help anything? Should we be thinking about this in some other way? -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Preventing-re-evaluation-on-modificatio... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.