Hi,
Thanks for the replies. I'm actually working with a big number of large rule sets
(ranging from 100 rules to up to 3000), which are generated based on another proprietary
language. These are not used system wide, but on a user per user basis and loaded
dynamically
In itself, the system handles itself well, as compiled packages are persisted on disk and
loaded only when a user requires it. Thing is, the memory footprint (and the size of the
persisted packages) has increased significantly when migrating from 4.0.7 to 5.4.0.Final
(20% to 30% for the large ones) and I am trying to find ways of trimming this down as much
as I can.
Going from a package name of 12 characters to 1 actually and rule names to 3-4 characters
shaved off 5-10% in most cases, so not so trivial :-)
Unfortunately, reducing the number of rules is not a option in my case, so any advice (or
explanation on the increase) is most welcome
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 01:42:47 -0700
From: dsotty(a)gmail.com
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Package footprint
I agree with Wolfgang... can you give us an idea of the rules you are working
with?
Actually:
- using shorter names might be a last-resort, unless you were using really
long names in the first place
- do not use redundant code is a good practice anyway!
- agreed, evals are evils :)
- changing the DialectConfigurations is absolutely dangerous, do that at
your own risk :)
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Package-footprint-tp4019721p4019735.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users