9:49 a.m.
Dear All,
I've finished the tests with the digit per digit comparison without eval,
but the performance does not increased a lot, it still taking about 1 minute
per CDR, that is so slow for a Telecom Carrier, follow a piece of the new
spreadsheet below:
*RuleSet* *pricing* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
*Sequencial* *true* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
*
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
*RuleTable Padrao* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *
CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *CONDITION* *
CONDITION* *ACTION* *PRIORITY * *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField
* *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField*
*PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingField* *PricingManager*
*manager* *salience* name digit0 == '$param' name digit1 == '$param'
name digit2
== '$param' name digit3 == '$param' name digit4 == '$param' name
digit5 ==
'$param' name digit6 == '$param' name digit7 == '$param' name
digit8 ==
'$param' name digit9 == '$param' name digit10 == '$param' name
digit11 ==
'$param' itemId setPrice($param)
Campo Digito1 Campo Digito2 Campo Digito3 Campo Digito4 Campo Digito5 Campo
Digito6 Campo Digito7 Campo Digito8 Campo Digito9 Campo Digito10 Campo
Digito11 Campo Digito12 ID do Item Preço Ordem digit0 5 digit1 5 digit2 9
digit3 9 digit4 3 digit5 2 digit6 6 digit7 3 digit8 1 digit9 0 digit10 0
digit11 9 300 0.32610 1 digit0 5 digit1 5 digit2 9 digit3 8 digit4 3 digit5
2 digit6 6 digit7 3 digit8 5 digit9 0 digit10 8 digit11 9 300 0.32610 2
digit0 5 digit1 5 digit2 9 digit3 8 digit4 3 digit5 2 digit6 6 digit7 3
digit8 5 digit9 0 digit10 8 digit11 8 300 0.32610 3 digit0 5 digit1 5
digit2 9 digit3 8 digit4 3 digit5 2 digit6 6 digit7 3 digit8 5 digit9 0
digit10 8 digit11 7 300 0.32610 4 digit0 5 digit1 5 digit2 9 digit3 8
digit4 3 digit5 2 digit6 6 digit7 2 digit8 5 digit9 0 digit10 0 digit11 6
300 0.32610 5
Do i need to make some special treatment to get Drools indexing my rules?
I'm using the guvnor to upload the spreadsheet and compile the rules.
Does anybody have some tips to increase the performance?
Thank you very much,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
2010/5/17 Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells(a)nds.com>
My advice is to try just having a single column:
strValue matches “$param.*”
you could also compare the performance of that to
eval(strValue.startsWith(“$param”))
Also presumably you are only wanting the first matching rule in your table
to fire, looking at the table below drools will fire all of the matching
rules, this will mean than any phone number with prefix 5511 will be charged
at 0.4 as that will be the last rule to fire.
Thomas
*From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Barton
*Sent:* 14 May 2010 20:59
*To:* Rules Users List
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
No problem. I'm not sure how you'd do this in a decision table (it's
probably pretty trivial) but in DRL you'd do:
rule "makePhoneNumber"
when
s: String()
then
insert(new PhoneNumber(s));
retract(s);
end
With two caveats:
1) you need some conditions on the String matched if there are other
Strings that don't make PhoneNumbers.
2) The rule could use a salience value higher than the pricing rules, but
that isn't necessary.
Actually, there's a third caveat, and it's a big one: this won't work with
sequential mode. This is because the rule above would alter working memory
with the expectation that the pricing rules would react to the change. If
you want to use sequential mode you'll have to convert to PhoneNumber
objects before hand. I understand that you're using this Jbilling package,
but is there no way you can put an intermediate adapter between the two?
It'd be as simple as inserting "new PhoneNumber(someString)" instead of
"someString".
--- On *Fri, 5/14/10, Antonio Anderson Souza <
antonio(a)voicetechnology.com.br>* wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza <antonio(a)voicetechnology.com.br>
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Rules Users List" <rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org>
Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 2:16 PM
Dear Greg,
Thanks very much for your reply.
I'm using sequential mode = true
Is there a way to create this PhoneNumber class, and convert the String to
the PhoneNumber object inside the Drools? Because I'm using a system called
JBilling and it send the phoneNumber as a String.
Sorry if those are basic questions, but I'm a newbie in Drools...
Thank you very much,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
2010/5/14 Greg Barton
<greg_barton@yahoo.com<http://mc/compose?to=greg_barton@yahoo.com>
>
Right off the bat I'd say try to get rid of the eval usage. Can you put
the phone number into an object like this:
class PhoneNumber {
private char digit0;
private char digit1;
///...same for the rest of the digits
public char getDigit0() { return digit0; }
public char getDigit1() { return digit1; }
}
Then the conditions would look like this:
digit0 == '$param'
Behind the scenes hopefully this will optimize better. The use of eval
won't optimize well.
Are you using sequential mode? This might be a good candidate for that if
setting the price does not trigger any other rules to fire.
--- On *Fri, 5/14/10, Antonio Anderson Souza
<antonioams@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=antonioams@gmail.com>
>* wrote:
From: Antonio Anderson Souza
<antonioams@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=antonioams@gmail.com>
>
Subject: [rules-users] Jbilling Drools performance
To: "Drools Users Mailing list"
<rules-users@lists.jboss.org<http://mc/compose?to=rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>
Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 1:28 PM
Dear All,
I'm deploying a JBilling using Drools in a Telecom Carrier in Brazil, and
I'm using Decision tables in xls files to execute the pricing, my pricing
table has about 40.000 rules, and I'm getting a terrible performance about
1.5 minute to execute the price of each CDR (Call Detail Record) mediated.
Follow bellow a small piece of my decision table:
*RuleTable Padrao*
*CONDITION*
*CONDITION*
*ACTION*
*PRIORITY *
*PricingField*
*PricingManager*
*manager*
*salience*
name
eval (strValue.charAt(0) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(1) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(2) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(3) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(4) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(5) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(6) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(7) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(8) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(9) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(10) == '$param')
eval (strValue.charAt(11) == '$param')
itemId
setPrice($param)
Campo
Digito1
Digito2
Digito3
Digito4
Digito5
Digito6
Digito7
Digito8
Digito9
Digito10
Digito11
Digito12
ID do Item
Preço
Ordem
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
8
300
0.00000
1
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
7
300
0.00000
2
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
6
300
0.00000
3
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
5
300
0.00000
4
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
4
300
0.00000
5
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
3
300
0.00000
6
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
3
5
8
8
0
1
8
2
300
0.00000
7
destinationnumber
5
5
1
1
300
0.40000
8
Is it normal? Are there somebody using Jbilling in a similar way? Does
anybody can help me?
Best regards,
Antonio Anderson Souza
Voice Technology
http://www.antonioams.com
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<http://mc/compose?to=rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<http://mc/compose?to=rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<http://mc/compose?to=rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
------------------------------
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you
have received this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies.
The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not
print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18
4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered
no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users