[rules-users] Perfromance issues and memory leaks in Drools

[Edson Tirelli]

    Nikhil,

    Maybe you are using the term "memory leak" loosely here, but otherwise,
Drools 4.0.7 and Drools 5.0.1 were both tested to exhaustion for memory
leaks and I can tell you that no memory leak was found, and I personally
doubt there is one there on regular use. Also, FYI, Drools 5.x eliminates
the need for shadow facts, what is a considerable memory save over 4.x, but
adds some other overheads for performance improvement that kind of offset
those gains. On the other hand, Drools 5.1.1 takes the algorithm to a new
level, saving a lot of memory on systems that use modify actions on their
rules.

http://blog.athico.com/2010/03/drools-halves-memory-use-with-new-true.html

    Regarding your performance, all I can tell you is that a rules engine is
a relational engine that works pretty much like a database, and rules as
databases queries. The same way you can write SQL queries that run fast or
slow on a database, you can write rules that run fast or slow on a rules
engine. It all depends on how the rules/queries are written, how your data
model/domain model looks like, etc.

    So, regarding your question, we can't tell you how to improve those
metrics without knowing your domain model, rules and etc.

    []s
    Edson

2010/9/17 Nikhil S. Kulkarni <Nikhil.Kulkarni at mastek.com>

>  Hi,
>
>
>
>                 I have written 2 different Drools programs. One is with
> Using rule Base of Drools 4.0 and other is using Knowledge Base of Drools
> 5.0.
>
> I was trying to check that is there any improvement in Drools 5.0. But I
> haven’t got any performance improvement in Drools 5.0 code compared to
> Drools 4.0.
>
>
>
>                 One more important thing is I am calling this drools code
> from  My application which itself is heavy application, when I am doing
> Performance tuning
>
> I got one point i.e. session.execute() method is taking around 6-7 seconds
> to initialize rules and even the memory utilized by Rules is huge.
>
>
>
> So is there any way that we can reduce the Memory leakage and improve
> performance.
>
>
>
> Waiting for Reply.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Nikhil S. Kulkarni
>
> Emp No: - 9254
>
>
>
>
>
> MASTEK LTD.
> In the US, we're called MAJESCOMASTEK
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual and not that of Mastek Limited, unless specifically indicated to that effect. Mastek Limited does not accept any responsibility or liability for it. This e-mail and attachments (if any) transmitted with it are confidential and/or privileged and solely for the use of the intended person or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. This e-mail and its attachments have been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. It is the responsibility of the recipient to run the virus check on e-mails and attachments before opening them. If you have received this e-mail in error, kindly delete this e-mail from desktop and server.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100917/2573a187/attachment.html