[rules-users] Fundamental Question

[Anstis, Michael (M.)]

IMO, the analogy between Rule Engine and ORDBMS *could* be made with only
very simple business rules covering one object (presumably mapped to one
table). However you would still need to design mechanisms to support truth
maintenance and an activation schedule. Once the complexity of your business
rules exceeds even the very simple you will need to implement a whole host
of cross-table-triggers to support different objects in a rule (and who
knows how complex the business rules will become?). This doesn't even touch
upon more advanced features like collect and accumulate. You would be in
essence implement a rule engine in a ORDBMS using the ORDBMS triggers and
tables as the RETE network nodes. I would compare using a rule engine vs
ORDBMS to using say, RichFaces instead of HTML and the XMLHttpRequest
object: both can achieve the same result but one is more painful. Drools is
free, fast, feature rich and easy to use. Why reinvent the wheel?

With kind regards,

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Raffi
Khatchadourian
Sent: 23 April 2008 16:48
To: rules-users
Subject: [rules-users] Fundamental Question

What is the difference in using a rules engine like drools as opposed to
using either an object database or ORDBMS mapping to a database with
triggers?
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7206 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20080424/3c79fe51/attachment.bin