10:38 p.m.
Hi there,
I am not really sure what is the best approach to model this the drools
way... So, what is the best approach using drools to find all objects of
a known type that fulfil certain criterias? Caveat: The number of
criterias is flexible and not known?
I know, that such a selection process can be defined as simple case of
constraint programming. Afaik this could be a problem for any rulebased
system. Yet we do not want to introduce another compontent as this leads
to dependency and communication issues.
Example:
Assume a class book with properties "author", "year", "id"
and
"publisher". As our problem is more complex I want to test book
instances for the properties "author", "year" etc. in individual
rules.
Now, given a list of books in the working memory I want to get answer to
the following questions:
- List all books with author="myName", id="123"
- List all book with publisher="Frank"
Due to the closed world assumption in Java and hence Drools, what is not
possible is:
rule "MyRule"
when
book(year==myYear, author==myAuthor ...)
then
....
This works only if all properties myYear, myAuthor ... are present. If
one is undefined, the rule does not match.
The System:
The system uses drools quite successfully for many tasks. All data
objects are persisted using db4o.
Currently, I can think of two different approaches:
1)
- Start with all objects in the working memory
- For each condition, if present, flag all objects, that do not
fulfil this condition, as invalid
- Afterwards, list / process all objects that are not marked as invalid
2)
- Start with no object in the working memory
- Construct a blank object of the type analyzed
- If a certain condition is present, add this conidtion to
the object
- Query the object database in db4o and add all valid matching
object to the working memory. (db4o supports QueryByExample)
The double negotiation in the first approach is hard to understand and
difficult to maintain. The second approach works reasonably well yet
moves some of the main application logic to another component.
So, any clues, pointers or ideas how to solve this problem in a better way?
cu, Michael
11:25 p.m.
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Michael Zimmermann <list(a)incunabulum.de> wrote:
rule "MyRule"
when
book(year==myYear, author==myAuthor ...)
then
....
This works only if all properties myYear, myAuthor ... are
present. If one is undefined, the rule does not match.
You could have a function that returns true if the properties match or the property is
null:
boolean matchesOrNull(Object o, Object p) {
return p == null ? true : ( o == null ? true : o.equals(p) );
}
Call it using eval in the conditions.
Maybe if it's useful enough an operator could be added to Drools that does the same
thing. "~=" maybe?
GreG
12:02 a.m.
Someone poppe onto irc a few months back, claiming they did this for
their company and would provide the code as a patch - never heard
anything after that though :(
So if that person is read, please upload your patch to JIRA :)
Mark
Greg Barton wrote:
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Michael Zimmermann <list(a)incunabulum.de>
wrote:
> rule "MyRule"
> when
> book(year==myYear, author==myAuthor ...)
> then
> ....
>
> This works only if all properties myYear, myAuthor ... are
> present. If one is undefined, the rule does not match.
>
You could have a function that returns true if the properties match or the property is
null:
boolean matchesOrNull(Object o, Object p) {
return p == null ? true : ( o == null ? true : o.equals(p) );
}
Call it using eval in the conditions.
Maybe if it's useful enough an operator could be added to Drools that does the same
thing. "~=" maybe?
GreG
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
12:21 a.m.
Hi Mark, Greg
Mark Proctor wrote:
Someone poppe onto irc a few months back, claiming they did this for
their company and would provide the code as a patch - never heard
anything after that though :( So if that person is read, please
upload your patch to JIRA :)
> Maybe if it's useful enough an operator could be added to
Drools
> that does the same thing. "~=" maybe?
Using the function to simulate the open world assumption is a neat idea!
The eval() requirements not so much....
Mark, as I am not afraid of digging into the code base... any pointers
where I should start looking to add this behaviour? Some class or
package name would help as drools is not so small :)
cu, Michael
12:31 a.m.
New subject: Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
3:54 a.m.
New subject: Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
I'll say it before someone else...
Evals are the devil, avoid them. From memory, the newer drools handles old
rules poorly, using extensive use of evals. It's the reason we have not
moved up to the newest version yet. It's probably not pretty but you may
have to rewrite/reconfigure your rules to avoid the use of evals, if that
3x performance is a significant issue.
-Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Rout, Sushanta
(ThoughtMill)
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 10:32 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
3:59 a.m.
New subject: Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints properly
inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster than Drools
2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules. Please read the
manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of version 2. Version 4 is
an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to
drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
4:46 a.m.
New subject: Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Thanks Edson. Is there any example to rewrite the rule without rule?
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints properly
inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster than Drools
2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules. Please read the
manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of version 2. Version 4
is an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
2:44 a.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
Folks -
After seeing the thread on evals hurting performance a couple of weeks
ago, I tried to remove them from a rule set we are using (running Drools
4.0.4), and have had limited success.
An example is shown below. We're using evals every time we make a call
to "rulesUtil", a helper class we have for checking strings for
keywords. Two questions:
1. Does using inline evals (like below) hurt performance as much as
using non-inline evals?
2. If so, any thoughts for how to rewrite this rule to avoid using the
eval?
rule 'my rule'
salience 790
activation-group "priorityRule"
when
ruleUtil : RulesUtil( )
s1 : Sensor( source == "X, $rfp : RFP , eval(
ruleUtil.containsKeywordString($rfp, "Y" )) , $tcn : TCN)
s2 : Sensor( TCN != $tcn, source == "Z"
then
System.out.println("my rule");
priority.setPriorityName("A");
end
Thanks,
David Warren
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints properly
inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster than Drools
2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules. Please read the
manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of version 2. Version 4
is an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched
to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like
drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the
issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest :
CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5
&&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() !=
null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() !=
null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
10:56 p.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
David,
Eval is really bad for perf, but still, sometimes it is the only way to
do things like call methods. So, in your case, it all depends on what
"containsKeywordString()" method is doing?
Also, is RulesUtil just a utility class? I mean with no data you reason
over? if so, I strongly advise you to make it a global, instead of matching
it in the rule like a fact.
Regarding evals, inline evals are just a bit lighter than top level
evals, but there is an important difference:
* inline evals MUST be time consistent, i.e., they must evaluate to the same
value everytime they are called.
* top level evals can deal with changes appropriately
[]s
Edson
2008/9/15 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
Folks -
After seeing the thread on evals hurting performance a couple of weeks ago,
I tried to remove them from a rule set we are using (running Drools 4.0.4),
and have had limited success.
An example is shown below. We're using evals every time we make a call to
"rulesUtil", a helper class we have for checking strings for keywords. Two
questions:
1. Does using inline evals (like below) hurt performance as much as using
non-inline evals?
2. If so, any thoughts for how to rewrite this rule to avoid using the
eval?
rule
'my rule'
*salience* 790
*activation-group* "priorityRule"
*when*
ruleUtil : RulesUtil( )
s1 : Sensor( source == "X, $rfp : RFP , *eval*(
ruleUtil.containsKeywordString($rfp, "Y" )) , $tcn : TCN)
s2 : Sensor( TCN != $tcn, source == "Z"
*then*
System.out.println("my rule");
priority.setPriorityName("A");
end
Thanks,
David Warren
------------------------------
*From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Edson Tirelli
*Sent:* Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
*To:* Rules Users List
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints properly
inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster than Drools
2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules. Please read the
manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of version 2. Version 4 is
an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
> We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to drools
> 4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
> is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
>
> Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
> rule "test"
> dialect "java"
> activation-group "group1"
> when
> $croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
> $resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
> eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
>
> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
> )) &&
> $croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
>
> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
> ) &&
> $croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
>
>
> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
> ale()) &&
>
> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
>
> then
> ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
> end
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
7:48 a.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
Edson -
Thank you very much for the reply. I have one more question. In the
example below I changed RulesUtil to be a global name 'ruleUtil' (since
its member variables do not change), and reran the rule (with the
'ruleUtil:RulesUtil()' line omitted).
When I do this, and execute the rule below, I get a null pointer
exception on PredicateConstraint. The first and last parts of the stack
trace are:
org.drools.RuntimeDroolsException: Exception executing predicate
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker@36289b82
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:2
16)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:132)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(Compo
siteObjectSinkAdapter.java:318)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:140)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(Compo
siteObjectSinkAdapter.java:299)
at
org.drools.reteoo.ObjectTypeNode.assertObject(ObjectTypeNode.java:153)
...
Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
at
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule__0.returnValue0(Rule_my_rule_0.java:27)
at
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker.evaluate(Rule_myRul
e_0ReturnValue0Invoker.java:21)
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:2
10)
... 29 more
I'm not sure what is causing this. Any thoughts?
If it helps, RulesUtil.containsKeywordString() checks to see if a
string passed in is present in a list of keywords held in the class.
Thanks -
David
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:56 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Request for assistance in removing eval from
a rule
David,
Eval is really bad for perf, but still, sometimes it is the only way
to do things like call methods. So, in your case, it all depends on what
"containsKeywordString()" method is doing?
Also, is RulesUtil just a utility class? I mean with no data you
reason over? if so, I strongly advise you to make it a global, instead
of matching it in the rule like a fact.
Regarding evals, inline evals are just a bit lighter than top level
evals, but there is an important difference:
* inline evals MUST be time consistent, i.e., they must evaluate to the
same value everytime they are called.
* top level evals can deal with changes appropriately
[]s
Edson
2008/9/15 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
Folks -
After seeing the thread on evals hurting performance a couple of
weeks ago, I tried to remove them from a rule set we are using (running
Drools 4.0.4), and have had limited success.
An example is shown below. We're using evals every time we make
a call to "rulesUtil", a helper class we have for checking strings for
keywords. Two questions:
1. Does using inline evals (like below) hurt performance as much
as using non-inline evals?
2. If so, any thoughts for how to rewrite this rule to avoid
using the eval?
rule
'my rule'
salience 790
activation-group "priorityRule"
when
ruleUtil : RulesUtil( )
s1 : Sensor( source == "X, $rfp : RFP , eval(
ruleUtil.containsKeywordString($rfp, "Y" )) , $tcn : TCN)
s2 : Sensor( TCN != $tcn, source == "Z"
then
System.out.println("my rule");
priority.setPriorityName("A");
end
Thanks,
David Warren
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7
Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints
properly inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster
than Drools 2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules.
Please read the manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of
version 2. Version 4 is an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have
switched to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance
like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered
the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar
to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest :
CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber :
ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
8:26 a.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
Are use setting the global in your application code?
2008/9/16 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
Edson -
Thank you very much for the reply. I have one more question. In the
example below I changed RulesUtil to be a global name 'ruleUtil' (since its
member variables do not change), and reran the rule (with
the 'ruleUtil:RulesUtil()' line omitted).
When I do this, and execute the rule below, I get a null pointer exception
on PredicateConstraint. The first and last parts of the stack trace are:
org.drools.RuntimeDroolsException: Exception executing predicate
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker@36289b82
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:216)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:132)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.java:318)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:140)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.java:299)
at org.drools.reteoo.ObjectTypeNode.assertObject(ObjectTypeNode.java:153)
...
Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule__0.returnValue0(Rule_my_rule_0.java:27)
at
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker.evaluate(Rule_myRule_0ReturnValue0Invoker.java:21)
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:210)
... 29 more
I'm not sure what is causing this. Any thoughts?
If it helps, RulesUtil.containsKeywordString() checks to see if a string
passed in is present in a list of keywords held in the class.
Thanks -
David
------------------------------
*From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Edson Tirelli
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:56 AM
*To:* Rules Users List
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Request for assistance in removing eval from
a rule
David,
Eval is really bad for perf, but still, sometimes it is the only way to
do things like call methods. So, in your case, it all depends on what
"containsKeywordString()" method is doing?
Also, is RulesUtil just a utility class? I mean with no data you reason
over? if so, I strongly advise you to make it a global, instead of matching
it in the rule like a fact.
Regarding evals, inline evals are just a bit lighter than top level
evals, but there is an important difference:
* inline evals MUST be time consistent, i.e., they must evaluate to the
same value everytime they are called.
* top level evals can deal with changes appropriately
[]s
Edson
2008/9/15 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
> Folks -
>
> After seeing the thread on evals hurting performance a couple of weeks
> ago, I tried to remove them from a rule set we are using (running Drools
> 4.0.4), and have had limited success.
>
> An example is shown below. We're using evals every time we make a call to
> "rulesUtil", a helper class we have for checking strings for keywords.
Two
> questions:
>
> 1. Does using inline evals (like below) hurt performance as much as using
> non-inline evals?
> 2. If so, any thoughts for how to rewrite this rule to avoid using the
> eval?
>
>
> rule
> 'my rule'
> *salience* 790
> *activation-group* "priorityRule"
> *when*
> ruleUtil : RulesUtil( )
> s1 : Sensor( source == "X, $rfp : RFP , *eval*(
> ruleUtil.containsKeywordString($rfp, "Y" )) , $tcn : TCN)
> s2 : Sensor( TCN != $tcn, source == "Z"
> *then*
> System.out.println("my rule");
> priority.setPriorityName("A");
>
> end
>
> Thanks,
> David Warren
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
> rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Edson Tirelli
> *Sent:* Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
> *To:* Rules Users List
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on 4.0.7 Vs 2.5
>
>
> Start by eliminating the evals and writing your constraints properly
> inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of magnitude faster than Drools
> 2.x, but you need to leverage its power in your rules. Please read the
> manual as the version 3 was a completely rewrite of version 2. Version 4 is
> an improvement over 3.
>
> As an example, look at this:
> http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
>
> []s
> Edson
>
> 2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) <Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
>
>> We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we have switched to drools
>> 4.0.7. But we see significant issues with performance like drools 4.0.7
>> is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody encountered the issue?
>>
>> Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more similar to this.
>> rule "test"
>> dialect "java"
>> activation-group "group1"
>> when
>> $croNumberDetailsRequest : CRONumberDetailsRequest()
>> $resdirectPhoneNumber : ResdirectPhoneNumber()
>> eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
>>
>> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
>> )) &&
>> $croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
>>
>> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
>> ) &&
>> $croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
>>
>>
>> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
>> ale()) &&
>>
>> $resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
>>
>> then
>> ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
>> end
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Edson Tirelli
> JBoss Drools Core Development
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
1:10 a.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
Edson -
Thanks for the reply. I am setting the global prior to calling the
rules.
That said, I was able to fix my problem by removing the evals from my
rules, using the method described by Mohammed Riyaz in a post yesterday
(thanks Mohammed!). Removing the evals also remedied a problem we were
seeing where our rules using evals would occasionally fail due to null
pointer exceptions throw by PredicateConstraint when being run by a
multi-thread job (very similar to what's noted in issue JBRULES-1751).
I defined all the methods in our RulesUtil class as static, imported the
functions, and referenced them inside an exists() clause like this:
exists( Boolean( booleanValue==true) from containsKeyword($myString) )
-David
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 7:26 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Request for assistance in removing eval from
a rule
Are use setting the global in your application code?
2008/9/16 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
Edson -
Thank you very much for the reply. I have one more question.
In the example below I changed RulesUtil to be a global name 'ruleUtil'
(since its member variables do not change), and reran the rule (with the
'ruleUtil:RulesUtil()' line omitted).
When I do this, and execute the rule below, I get a null pointer
exception on PredicateConstraint. The first and last parts of the stack
trace are:
org.drools.RuntimeDroolsException: Exception executing predicate
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker@36289b82
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:2
16)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:132)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(Compo
siteObjectSinkAdapter.java:318)
at org.drools.reteoo.AlphaNode.assertObject(AlphaNode.java:140)
at
org.drools.reteoo.CompositeObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(Compo
siteObjectSinkAdapter.java:299)
at
org.drools.reteoo.ObjectTypeNode.assertObject(ObjectTypeNode.java:153)
...
Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
at
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule__0.returnValue0(Rule_my_rule_0.java:27)
at
com.bah.aims.rules.Rule_my_rule_0ReturnValue0Invoker.evaluate(Rule_myRul
e_0ReturnValue0Invoker.java:21)
at
org.drools.rule.PredicateConstraint.isAllowed(PredicateConstraint.java:2
10)
... 29 more
I'm not sure what is causing this. Any thoughts?
If it helps, RulesUtil.containsKeywordString() checks to see if
a string passed in is present in a list of keywords held in the class.
Thanks -
David
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:56 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Request for assistance in removing
eval from a rule
David,
Eval is really bad for perf, but still, sometimes it is the
only way to do things like call methods. So, in your case, it all
depends on what "containsKeywordString()" method is doing?
Also, is RulesUtil just a utility class? I mean with no data
you reason over? if so, I strongly advise you to make it a global,
instead of matching it in the rule like a fact.
Regarding evals, inline evals are just a bit lighter than top
level evals, but there is an important difference:
* inline evals MUST be time consistent, i.e., they must evaluate
to the same value everytime they are called.
* top level evals can deal with changes appropriately
[]s
Edson
2008/9/15 Warren, David [USA] <warren_david(a)bah.com>
Folks -
After seeing the thread on evals hurting performance a
couple of weeks ago, I tried to remove them from a rule set we are using
(running Drools 4.0.4), and have had limited success.
An example is shown below. We're using evals every time
we make a call to "rulesUtil", a helper class we have for checking
strings for keywords. Two questions:
1. Does using inline evals (like below) hurt performance
as much as using non-inline evals?
2. If so, any thoughts for how to rewrite this rule to
avoid using the eval?
rule
'my rule'
salience 790
activation-group "priorityRule"
when
ruleUtil : RulesUtil( )
s1 : Sensor( source == "X, $rfp : RFP , eval(
ruleUtil.containsKeywordString($rfp, "Y" )) , $tcn : TCN)
s2 : Sensor( TCN != $tcn, source == "Z"
then
System.out.println("my rule");
priority.setPriorityName("A");
end
Thanks,
David Warren
________________________________
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:59 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Drools, Performance issues on
4.0.7 Vs 2.5
Start by eliminating the evals and writing your
constraints properly inside the patterns. Drools 3+ is orders of
magnitude faster than Drools 2.x, but you need to leverage its power in
your rules. Please read the manual as the version 3 was a completely
rewrite of version 2. Version 4 is an improvement over 3.
As an example, look at this:
http://blog.athico.com/2006/11/rush-hour-and-content-based-routing.html
[]s
Edson
2008/9/5 Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill)
<Sushanta.Rout(a)ihg.com>
We were using Drools 2.5 version earlier. Now we
have switched to drools
4.0.7. But we see significant issues with
performance like drools 4.0.7
is three times slower than 2.5 . Has anybody
encountered the issue?
Here is a sample of the rule, we have some more
similar to this.
rule "test"
dialect "java"
activation-group "group1"
when
$croNumberDetailsRequest :
CRONumberDetailsRequest()
$resdirectPhoneNumber :
ResdirectPhoneNumber()
eval($resdirectPhoneNumber.getType().getId() == 5 &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForBrand($croNumberDetailsRequest.getBrand(
)) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidRegion($croNumberDetailsRequest.getRegion()
) &&
$croNumberDetailsRequest.getLocale() != null &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidForLocaleId($croNumberDetailsRequest.getLoc
ale()) &&
$resdirectPhoneNumber.isValidSlot($croNumberDetailsRequest.getSlot()));
then
ResultList.add($resdirectPhoneNumber);
end
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
8 p.m.
New subject: Request for assistance in removing eval from a rule
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Warren, David [USA]
<warren_david(a)bah.com> wrote:
If it helps, RulesUtil.containsKeywordString() checks to see if a
string
passed in is present in a list of keywords held in the class.
maybe it would work if you asserted your keywords as a List<String>
global and then did something like
s1 : Sensor( source == "X", $rfp : RFP , $rfp memberOf keywordList , $tcn :
TCN)
But I'm not sure if "memberOf" would work in this case since the
documentation states that it requires a variable.
Best regards
Marcus
5711
days inactive
5723
days old
13 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Edson Tirelli -
Greg Barton -
Marcus Ilgner -
Mark Proctor -
Michael Rhoden -
Michael Zimmermann -
Rout, Sushanta (ThoughtMill) -
Warren, David [USA]