Re: [rules-users] some basic questions to grouping

Hi, I'm having some difficulty to understand the concept of grouping, but maybe it's only because of my understanding of the terms, so please apologize for the silly question 1. when you are saying "rules fire", does this mean: matching/checking the LHS of rule, or executing the RHS of rule 2. I plan to use the grouping features of drools, but still not sure whether(and how) to use the agenda or activation group (or even the rule-flow). My problem domain is actually quite simple: - rules are applied based on e.g age of a person. Now, there are some rules for 17-year-or older, and some for 30-year-old person, if I'm to use the agenda group, I'd define the following: rule1 agenda-group "17 years-old or older" when p:Person (Age > 17) .... rule2 agenda-group "17 years-old or older" when p:Person (Age > 17) ..... rule3 agenda-group "30 years-old or older" when p:Person (Age > 30) ...... rule4 agenda-group "30 years-old or older" when p:Person (Age > 30) ...... If I assert a person into the WM to check his/her age, I want that only the rules in 30-years-old agenda are CHECKED (and eventually executed when the other constraints are fulfilled), bcs they are surely older than 17 as well. And this is not only for comparing ages. Another example, some rules are only for Gender.MALE, and some only for Gender.FEMALE. So if a person is asserted, only the rules with corresponding gender will be checked and no need of checking/matching the other group The main purpose is just to skip checking unrelevant rules (imagine if there is only 1 rule for MALE and 1000 rules for FEMALE with 1000 times WHEN person (gender == FEMALE) checking for an asserted male-object). How can I do this effectively? Or will ALL rules checked and only the order of checking (and eventually exection of their RHS) is defined by the grouping? I hope I've described my problem clearly and I'll try to explain this again in case of difficulty :) Thanks in advance Regards