It's going to help (probably) if you include the definition of your rule
(or rules).

2012/1/30 Philipp Herzig <[email protected]>

> Dear Community,
>
> Drools is pretty fast regarding all my use cases. However, today I have
> found a problem where I cannot find any solution. Hopefully someone of you
> can help.
>
> 1. I have a rule with a @timer(10s) attribute (should be 24h later on but
> doesn't matter). This rule is activated when a "create" event occurs and
> invalidated once a "delete" event occurs within the timeframe of @timer.
>
> 2. I have approx. 9000 "create" events which are bulk loaded into the
> working memory and creating activations for the rule above.
>
> 3. I have approx. 2000 "delete" events which are bulk loaded into my
> entry-point cancelling the respective activations from step (2)
>
> 4. After the timer expired, the first activation is fired correctly.
> However, all other activations are fired with some noticeable delay
> (actually it needs 20-30minutes until all activations are fired).
>
>
> Do you have an idea what the problem with the timer might be?
> Unfortunately, I have neither an idea how the scheduler in the background
> works nor which class I should start looking at.
>
> BTW: For testing purpose I switched step (2) & (3), that is, "delete"
> events are inserted before the "create" events and removed the timer
> attribute which is obviously the same logic. It performs lightning fast in
> this case... (all remaining activations are fired within 5
> seconds). However, insertinging my "delete" events before the "create"
> events is ok for testing but not feasible in practice.
>
> It would be great if some of you has an idea or point to start within the
> code.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Philipp
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to