3:56 a.m.
Hi Chaps,
We currently use Jrules 5 and are looking at our options going forward. We
are going to evaluate Drools alongside some other products. So far I like
the look of Drools but there are a couple of things that are puzzling me...
- In our Jrules implementation our BOM/XOM exposes some of our application
logic so that our rules can access application code and services to make
decisions and updates where necessary. I can't see how this is possible in
Drools.
- Our ruleflows use decision tables to define which rules will run dependant
upon the transaction type received. This makes assigning a rule to a single
ruleflow group inappropriate as one rule could be used by many different
transactions. Is it possible to create an ArrayList of rules and execute
them one at a time via ruleflow action node?
Many Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
4:28 a.m.
On 26/05/2010 09:56, paulnnosh wrote:
Hi Chaps,
We currently use Jrules 5 and are looking at our options going forward. We
are going to evaluate Drools alongside some other products. So far I like
the look of Drools but there are a couple of things that are puzzling me...
- In our Jrules implementation our BOM/XOM exposes some of our application
logic so that our rules can access application code and services to make
decisions and updates where necessary. I can't see how this is possible in
Drools.
Pojos just work out of the box, it's much simpler :) So any inserted
object is a pojo and is a direct reference to the object the user
inserted. Use globals (also simple pojos) for registering and accessing
services.
- Our ruleflows use decision tables to define which rules will run
dependant
upon the transaction type received. This makes assigning a rule to a single
ruleflow group inappropriate as one rule could be used by many different
transactions. Is it possible to create an ArrayList of rules and execute
them one at a time via ruleflow action node?
JRules ruleflow and Drools ruleflow are very different. In JRules each
ruleflow group is a separate knowledge base and executes statelessly.
Where as RuleFlow in drools is for a single knowledge base and stateful
sessions.
You can simulate the more traditional ilog way by using Drools Flow, and
create a "work item" to execute some input vars against a stateless
session. This way each branch can have it's own knowledge base and copy
of relevant rules.
Mark
Many Thanks
4:52 a.m.
Thanks Mark, very helpful.
I'm about to set up a Proof of concept so I'll try it out. Due to the
relatively complex nature of our ruleflows and the fact that many rules can
be used by many transaction types Drools Flow sounds like it will have to be
the way to go. I'm out about to dig out the flow manual....;-)
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5:04 a.m.
I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to give access to
application services etc...
I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the working memory are direct
references to the actual objects inserted by the calling application, that's
great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep telling you what we have
already!) a number of our functions make regualr use of a large number of
our core application classes. To have to insert all of these each time a
ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I have concerns about the
amount of working memory that would be required. Is it possible to create a
reference to my application and initilise this at the start up of the server
so that these classes are available to my packages without having to load
them into WM each time?
Many Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5:31 a.m.
On 27/05/2010 11:04, paulnnosh wrote:
I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to give access
to
application services etc...
I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the working memory are direct
references to the actual objects inserted by the calling application, that's
great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep telling you what we have
already!) a number of our functions make regualr use of a large number of
our core application classes. To have to insert all of these each time a
ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I have concerns about the
amount of working memory that would be required. Is it possible to create a
reference to my application and initilise this at the start up of the server
so that these classes are available to my packages without having to load
them into WM each time?
Globals.
Mark
Many Thanks
9:43 a.m.
Pithy as usual, Mark. :)
Paul, you partially mention a way to go about it: dependency injection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection
The best way to do that these days is with Spring using the Inversion of Control pattern:
http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/spring-framework-referen...
http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/spring-framework-referen...
--- On Thu, 5/27/10, Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org> wrote:
From: Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org>
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Date: Thursday, May 27, 2010, 5:31 AM
On 27/05/2010 11:04, paulnnosh
wrote:
> I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to
give access to
> application services etc...
>
> I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the
working memory are direct
> references to the actual objects inserted by the
calling application, that's
> great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep
telling you what we have
> already!) a number of our functions make regualr use
of a large number of
> our core application classes. To have to insert all of
these each time a
> ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I
have concerns about the
> amount of working memory that would be required. Is it
possible to create a
> reference to my application and initilise this at the
start up of the server
> so that these classes are available to my packages
without having to load
> them into WM each time?
>
Globals.
Mark
> Many Thanks
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
5093
days inactive
5094
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Greg Barton -
Mark Proctor -
paulnnosh