to be honest I could do with some initial pointers, as I'm struggling with how to acheive this at all. I would have thought to somehow use accumulate, but as far as I can work out there's no way to specify attributes that match across facts, rather than match some constant.
On 18 October 2010 15:14, Greg Barton <[email protected]> wrote: > It would be nice if we had an example of some rules. That way we can rule > out obvious performance killers like cartesian products and multiple "from" > clauses in one rule. > > GreG > > On Oct 18, 2010, at 5:19, Tim 4076 <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > I'm trying to use drools to do grouping of data according to patterns > defined in my rules, but I'm having issues creating something that works in > a reasonable amount of time (seconds). I've tried all sorts of permutations > without much luck and would like to hear how others would do the same thing. > > To give an example: I've got a big batch of transaction records and I want > to aggregate all the records where the consumer id and product category are > the same and the purchases were made within an hour of each other. > > The fact that its matching the same values between facts, rather than > against constants seems to scupper it somewhat. > > I would go down the ETL route, but the idea is for non-techies to define > their own aggregations using rules. > > -Cheers. Tim > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
_______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
