Bob Johnson wrote:
> Alan is correct. However, each of these instances is likely to be quite large.
> In our case, rule sets on the order of 100-200 rules,
> each Rete is roughly 12 megabytes each. Not to mention the time it takes to
> load the rules. I believe a threading solution is necessary for Jess to be
> practical in the (inter|intra)net server environment.
>
> What fraction of the Jess population intends to deploy in this configuration?
> Is this an urgent issue?
>
> Bob
Rather than going for a fine grained multithreading model, have you considered
partitioning your problem into multiple (subsumptive) production problems?
Not all problems can be dealt with this way, but if you can, each (sub) problem
could be run independently on different threads or even different processors.
For the multiple thread approach, you just need to protect the invocation of
each engine. For a multiple process approach, you'll need to deal with
communication issues, but you can scale to as many computers as you need for
the problem.
Both of this might be a bit of a pain. However developing a production rule
set, when rules get fired in a non repeatable order, isn't much fun either.
david
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the
list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
