[rules-users] DRL package builder or rule base error

[Edson Tirelli]

   You will not find any major impact in runtime performance, but it
obviously affects compile performance, because there are more rules to
compile.

   The Rete algorithm is know for scaling very well to increasing number of
rules, as long as the rules activated for each working memory actions remain
constant.

   Also, in the case of Drools, creating sessions is really cheap in terms
of performance, because most of the data structures, like node memories, are
lazily created and on an on-demand basis.

   []s
   Edson

2008/11/21 Maxim Veksler <maxim.veksler at gmail.com>

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 8:28 PM, vanshi <nilu.thakur at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have some set of rules which work on same Person object but depending on
>> whether a person is student/employee/Faculty, the rule will have dfferent
>> logic.
>>
>> So, I've made 3 .drl files, one will have all the rules for students,
>> other
>> for employee and then last .drl for faculty. All 3 .drl have same package
>> name (as the first statement in drl) but all rules are named differently.
>> When my rule engine starts, it reads these 3 drl files and adds them to a
>> single rule base, starts a new session, inserts person in working memory
>> and
>> fires rules.
>>
>> Now, my questions are...is there anything odd/wrong with this approach?
>> Secondly, I had some rules names same in different drl and when I changed
>> them ....then I started getting null pointer exception error..... during
>> parsing of drl files. Any idea why is that?
>>
>
> Hi vanshi,
> In our system the rules are deployed in a similar method:
> We have a "include.drl", "globles.drl", "common.drl" and the specific rules
> for each channel (C1, C2, C3).
>
> The "include.drl" and "globles.drl" are inserted at system load to each of
> the filtering files (common, C1, C2...).
> All the filtering files sit in the same package "com.XX.filtering".
>
> Up until now I had no problems with this approach, the only thing that I'm
> concerned with is the RuleBaes performance because we use several "Packages"
> to build the sessions.
>
> I hope someone on this list could answer if this working mode has effect on
> performance?
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Maxim Veksler
>
> "Free as in Freedom" - Do u GNU ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20081121/09c17298/attachment.html