I was assuming that repeated matches of the same element amon the 10 are excluded (which they probably aren't), so Thomas' formula is the correct one. -W
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Wolfgang Laun <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you constrain the number of possible matches of 10 elements, which, > without constraints, is quite a number (10! = 3628800)? > > Tests that produce a highly unlikely scenario aren't particularly useful. > > -W > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:40 AM, murphy <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I did some tests to get an opinion about the performance of drools (5.0.1). >> >> At one test I have a rule with 10 objects (same object-type) declared as >> condition and got an OutOfMemoryException. I noticed that the memory usage >> increases when I insert the last facts into my >> StatefulKnowledgeSession. On fact 7 it increases with 10MB, on fact 8 with >> 46MB and on fact 9 with 170MB. >> >> I debuged a little bit in the drools-source and noticed that the >> LeftTupleMemory increased exponential with the number of facts I inserted. >> >> My question about this behaviour: >> Is a condition limited to a handful of facts or do I have to change the >> syntax to get it working? I know that I could insert the same object-types >> as a list, but assume that I have 10 facts with different object-types. >> >> Thanks in reply, >> Christian >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://n3.nabble.com/high-memory-usage-for-rules-with-more-than-6-facts-as-condition-tp718114p718114.html >> Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users >> > _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
