[jboss-jira] [JBoss JIRA] Commented: (JBRULES-1056) Performance of RuleBase().addPackage(.) goes down on sub sequent instances of RuleBase with large number of packages.
Mark Proctor (JIRA)
jira-events at lists.jboss.org
Sun Aug 12 17:22:01 EDT 2007
[ http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1056?page=comments#action_12371812 ]
Mark Proctor commented on JBRULES-1056:
---------------------------------------
I see the test only does the first part, not the second part of re-adding rules to the same rulebase. I've updated the test as follows:
public void run() throws Exception {
List drls = generateDrls();
List pkgs = generatePackages( drls );
double time = 0;
for ( int i = 0; i < 20; i++ ) {
time += addPackages( pkgs,
RuleBaseFactory.newRuleBase(),
i + 1 );
}
System.out.println( "average time " + (time/20.0) + " seconds.\n\n" );
time = 0;
RuleBase rb = RuleBaseFactory.newRuleBase();
for ( int i = 0; i < 20; i++ ) {
time += addPackages( pkgs,
rb,
i + 1 );
}
System.out.println( "average time " + (time/20.0) + " seconds." );
}
private static double addPackages(List pkgs,
RuleBase rb,
int id) throws Exception {
double start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for ( Iterator it = pkgs.iterator(); it.hasNext(); ) {
Package pkg = (Package) it.next();
rb.addPackage( pkg );
}
double time = (System.currentTimeMillis() - start) / 1000.0;
System.out.println( "Added " + pkgs.size() + " packages to rulebase" + id + " in " + time + " seconds" );
return time;
}
and I get the following time outputs:
Added 200 packages to rulebase1 in 0.219 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase2 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase3 in 0.14 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase4 in 0.141 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase5 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase6 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase7 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase8 in 0.156 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase9 in 0.172 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase10 in 0.11 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase11 in 0.093 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase12 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase13 in 0.11 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase14 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase15 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase16 in 0.203 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase17 in 0.094 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase18 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase19 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase20 in 0.125 seconds
average time 0.13119999999999998 seconds.
Added 200 packages to rulebase1 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase2 in 0.11 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase3 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase4 in 0.172 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase5 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase6 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase7 in 0.11 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase8 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase9 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase10 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase11 in 0.172 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase12 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase13 in 0.094 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase14 in 0.125 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase15 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase16 in 0.11 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase17 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase18 in 0.188 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase19 in 0.109 seconds
Added 200 packages to rulebase20 in 0.094 seconds
average time 0.12190000000000001 seconds.
Interestingly I still don't get a difference, what are you guys doing differently?
Anyway the code currently is still inefficient due to the constant reload() call, so I'll fix that anyway and hopefully it will fix the issue that everyone else is getting.
> Performance of RuleBase().addPackage(.) goes down on sub sequent instances of RuleBase with large number of packages.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JBRULES-1056
> URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1056
> Project: JBoss Rules
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
> Components: Drl Parser/Builder
> Affects Versions: 4.0.0.GA
> Environment: Windows
> Reporter: Ming Jin
> Assigned To: Mark Proctor
> Fix For: 4.0.1
>
> Attachments: testdrools.zip
>
>
> I encountered a strange behavior when trying to test the performance of rule registration, meaning to add Package's to a new instance of RuleBase. I ran the same test 5 times in a sequence, and the RuleBase instance was discarded right away. The test ran with different different number of packages, 20, 50, 100, and 200. The results are as the followings:
>
> Added 20 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.15
> Added 20 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.21
> Added 20 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.21
> Added 20 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.301
> Added 20 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.18
> Added 20 packages to rulebase 5 times in 0:00:1.051
>
> Added 50 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.17
> Added 50 packages to rulebase in 0:00:1.422
> Added 50 packages to rulebase in 0:00:1.252
> Added 50 packages to rulebase in 0:00:1.322
> Added 50 packages to rulebase in 0:00:1.331
> Added 50 packages to rulebase 5 times in 0:00:5.497
>
> Added 100 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.19
> Added 100 packages to rulebase in 0:00:5.278
> Added 100 packages to rulebase in 0:00:5.297
> Added 100 packages to rulebase in 0:00:5.228
> Added 100 packages to rulebase in 0:00:5.327
> Added 100 packages to rulebase 5 times in 0:00:21.32
>
> Added 200 packages to rulebase in 0:00:0.22
> Added 200 packages to rulebase in 0:00:21.691
> Added 200 packages to rulebase in 0:00:21.481
> Added 200 packages to rulebase in 0:00:21.642
> Added 200 packages to rulebase in 0:00:21.341
> Added 200 packages to rulebase 5 times in 0:01:26.385
>
> As you can see, the timing of creating first RuleBase instance is always good, while the subsequent one's were very bad. Is there an attribute I could adjust in configuration to improve the performance for this scenario? Please advise if there is other alternatives. I would be glad to provide details if needed.
> The following test program would demonstrate the problem:
> import java.util.List;
> import java.util.ArrayList;
> import java.util.Random;
> import java.io.StringReader;
> import java.io.IOException;
> import org.drools.rule.Package;
> import org.drools.compiler.PackageBuilder;
> import org.drools.compiler.DroolsParserException;
> import org.drools.RuleBase;
> import org.drools.RuleBaseFactory;
> /**
> * Created by IntelliJ IDEA. User: SG0521861 Date: Aug 2, 2007 Time: 2:53:50 PM To change this template use File |
> * Settings | File Templates.
> */
> public class TestDrools {
> private static final String ALPHABET= "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz";
> private static final String DRL_TEMPLATE =
> "package testpackage\n" +
> "import test.TestObject\n"+
> "rule \"testrule_$1\"\n" +
> " when\n" +
> " h:TestObject(value1==\"$2\", value2 in (\"$3\"))\n" +
> " then\n" +
> " h.setResult(\"$4\");\n" +
> "end";
> private int count;
> public TestDrools(int count) {
> this.count = count;
> }
> public void run() throws Exception {
> List<String> drls = generateDrls();
> List<Package> pkgs = generatePackages(drls);
> for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
> addPackages(pkgs, i+1);
> }
> }
> private static RuleBase addPackages(List<Package> pkgs, int id) throws Exception {
> long time = System.currentTimeMillis();
> RuleBase rb = RuleBaseFactory.newRuleBase();
> for (Package pkg : pkgs)
> rb.addPackage(pkg);
> System.out.println("Added "+pkgs.size()+" packages to rulebase"+id+" in "+
> (System.currentTimeMillis()-time)/1000.0+" seconds");
> return rb;
> }
> private List<String> generateDrls() {
> List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(count);
> for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> list.add(getDrl(i));
> }
> return list;
> }
> private static List<Package> generatePackages(List<String> drls) throws DroolsParserException, IOException {
> List<Package> list = new ArrayList<Package>(drls.size());
> for (String drl : drls) {
> PackageBuilder builder = new PackageBuilder();
> builder.addPackageFromDrl(new StringReader(drl));
> list.add(builder.getPackage());
> }
> return list;
> }
> private String getDrl(int seed) {
> String drl = DRL_TEMPLATE.replace("$1", Integer.toString(seed));
> drl = drl.replace("$2", getRandomString());
> drl = drl.replace("$3", getRandomString());
> return drl.replace("$4", getRandomString());
> }
> private Random rand = new Random();
> private String getRandomString() {
> StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
> for (int i = Math.abs(rand.nextInt() % 16) + 1; i-- > 0; )
> sb.append(ALPHABET.charAt(Math.abs(rand.nextInt() % ALPHABET.length())));
> return sb.toString();
> }
> public static void main(String[] argv) {
> if (argv.length > 0) {
> try {
> new TestDrools(Integer.parseInt(argv[0])).run();
> }
> catch (Exception ex) {
> ex.printStackTrace();
> }
> }
> else
> System.out.println("Usage: TestDrool [# of packages]");
> }
> }
> package test;
> /**
> * Created by IntelliJ IDEA. User: SG0521861 Date: Aug 2, 2007 Time: 3:38:13 PM To change this template use File |
> * Settings | File Templates.
> */
> public class TestObject {
> private String value1;
> private String value2;
> private String result;
> public String getValue1() { return value1; }
> public void setValue1(String value1) { this.value1 = value1; }
> public String getValue2() { return value2; }
> public void setValue2(String value2) { this.value2 = value2; }
> public String getResult() { return result; }
> public void setResult(String result) { this.result = result; }
> }
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
More information about the jboss-jira
mailing list