[rules-users] Stateless or stateful knowledge session in drools server

[Stephen Masters]

I can't say much about drools server. I went for a Spring web app wrapping a stateful session, and exposing itself to .NET applications via a SOAP API and a bit of REST. But that's cos I like Spring. :)

If you do need to work with a stateful session, you shouldn't need to 'isolate' any data as such. You can insert facts relating to all users into working memory and then include the user ID on a request when you insert it into working memory. That way, you just need your rules to have constraints that match a user fact to some other fact on which you're making decisions. Treat it a bit like a join in a database. You keep data relating to all your users in the database, but when you query the database, you join/filter on the user ID, or some other relevant key.

Steve



On 14 Feb 2013, at 16:27, Tim Slonaker <tslonaker+drools at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
>  
> I am new to drools.  My company is looking into switching from a commercial rule engine to drools.  Our existing codebase is .net not Java.  We are trying to integrate drools into our existing .net application by calling into a drools-server using it’s restful interface. 
> 
>  
> Our current rule engine only works in a stateless mode so I am trying to figure out how to get drools-server to work in a stateless mode.  I have posted before that I have been having difficulty using a stateless session with ruleflows (http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Ruleflow-not-working-with-stateless-session-in-drools-server-5-5-0-Final-td4021624.html).  I have noticed that the stateful sessions seem to work fine as far as ruleflows are concerned.  I am wondering if I can use a stateful session instead of stateless.
> 
>  
> Our application could have 100s of unique users per minute.  The rule engine provides a unique decision for each user based on their specific data.  So, each user’s data / facts should be isolated.  There can’t be any data sharing between users, that would make the rule engine decisions invalid.  How would I configure a stateful session to work in this scenario?  Is it possible?
> 
>  
> Thanks,
> 
> Tim S.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130214/0cdf22dd/attachment.html