[rules-users] Activate/Deactivate parts of the rule sets

[Tina Vießmann]

Thank you to all of you. :) I will think it through and see where it'll 
take me.


> There is the little documented "enabled" attribute too...
>
> http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/executing-ruleflow-with-AgendaFilter-td60084.html
>
> But agenda group would provide what you're after (unless you need a 
> single rule in two groups).
>
> 2010/10/28 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com 
> <mailto:wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>>
>
>     Look at the agenda-group attribute. Setting the focus makes just
>     the group's rules
>     eligible for firing. Falling back to the "MAIN" (default) group is
>     automatic, after
>     all group rules have been "exhausted". I think this is what you
>     mean with your #2
>
>     Solution 1 could be used, too; efficiency's not a problem.
>
>     -W
>
>     -W
>
>
>     On 28 October 2010 02:08, Tina Vießmann
>     <tviessmann at stud.hs-bremen.de
>     <mailto:tviessmann at stud.hs-bremen.de>> wrote:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         I'm thinking about how to activate/deactivate parts of the
>         rule set
>         during runtime. I'm doing some brainstorming about that and
>         would be
>         happy, if I could get more experienced input. ;-)
>
>         What I want to do:
>         I have several rules where I process 4 different objects
>         separate and
>         some rules processing combinations of the 4 objects. Now I
>         want to be
>         able to activate/decativate the processing of e.g. one of the
>         objects at
>         runtime when my application receives a specific command.
>         How can I do that?
>
>         My thoughts:
>         1.) I thought about maybe inserting a fact that states if the
>         processing
>         of a object is disabled. If I'm including the fact in the rules
>         conditions, the rules including the specific object are
>         prevent from
>         firing. But I could imagine that is results in performance
>         costs because
>         its always checked in every rule condition if the specific
>         processing is
>         (de)activated.
>         2.) Is it possible to (de)activate the execution of rules for
>         a specific
>         object using some grouping...
>         3.) Is it possible to rebuild the knowledge base during
>         runtime using
>         templates and incremental change-set processing. Or something
>         alike...
>         (Because the separate processing of the 4 objects is kind of
>         identical.)
>
>         Thanks for any input! :)
>
>         Tina
>         _______________________________________________
>         rules-users mailing list
>         rules-users at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>         https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     rules-users mailing list
>     rules-users at lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20101028/a61e996b/attachment.html