Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-jess-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ernest Friedman-Hill
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 2:26 PM
To: jess-users
Subject: Re: JESS: Performance question
On Aug 29, 2008, at 12:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The performance of the second version
Is the equality comparison using == or equals?
-Russ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ernest Friedman-Hill
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 2:26 PM
To: jess-users
Subject: Re: JESS: Performance question
On Aug 29, 2008, at 12:58 PM, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ernest Friedman-Hill
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 2:26 PM
To: jess-users
Subject: Re: JESS: Performance question
On Aug 29, 2008, at 12:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The performance of the second version is much slower, especially as
the number of facts increases. Is this just
I have the following scenario. I have about 72K facts, divided into two
groups, A and B. I'm looking to find the pairs of A and B based on the
relationship between one of the slots. In one case, my test is equality
between the two slots and in another it is based on a function that
checks for
On 8/29/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(MetricValue (name foo)
(group A)
(testslot ?A_testslot)
)
(MetricValue (name foo)
(group B)
(testslot ?B_testslot:(similar ?B_testslot ?A_testslot)
)
)
: Performance question
On 8/29/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(MetricValue (name foo)
(group A)
(testslot ?A_testslot)
)
(MetricValue (name foo)
(group B)
(testslot ?B_testslot:(similar ?B_testslot
On Aug 29, 2008, at 12:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The performance of the second version is much slower, especially as
the number of facts increases. Is this just the overhead of my
function call vs. equals. Does anyone have suggestions about
possible restructuring of the problem that
