Is it required to use WorkingMemory.update to update an existing fact?
I thought if assert behavior was set to equality and you implemented the
equals method properly, then you could simply use WorkingMemory.insert
to overwrite a fact in working memory with a new version. If this isn't
the case, t
g memory if you still have the
original non-modified object, or if behavior is equals based, using an
equals object.
[]
Edson
2008/5/30 Fenderbosch, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Is it required to use WorkingMemory.update to update an existing
fact?
I thought if assert be
I didn't find a JIRA for this and I'm pretty sure my test is valid.
QueryResult.getFactHandles() seems to be only returning [fid:-1:X:null]
I'm using 4.0.7.
Here's my test case:
public void testQueryResults() throws Exception {
StatefulSession workingMemory = DroolsUtil.getWorkingMemory(
Any feedback on this? Just curious, we've worked around it, but I'd
like to know if my assumption was wrong or if this is an actual problem.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fenderbosch,
Eric
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11:39 AM
Looks like there's a JIRA for this now. Some feedback would have been
nice, however.
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1649
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fenderbosch,
Eric
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:00 AM
To: Rules
We are having a similar problem, although our fact count is much higher.
Performance seems pretty good and consistent until about 400k facts,
then performance degrades significantly. Part of the degradation is
from bigger and more frequent GCs, but not all of it.
Time to load first 100k facts: ~1
t: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:39 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Drools 4 poor performance scaling?
Fenderbosch, Eric wrote:
> We are having a similar problem, although our fact count is much
higher.
> Performance seems pretty good and consistent until about 400k facts,
> the
ooping going on with accumulation on the fly, at least with our facts
and rules.
I'll put an entry on the wiki as well.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fenderbosch,
Eric
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 11:46 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: R
I'm just looking for a bit of verification that this is a reasonable
solution. This just feels like a hack and there's probably a better way
that I'm just not seeing. Alternate ideas are welcome and appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
The objective is to find the best workers for a job:
Jobs have a
I just realized I could use the "from" CE to avoid this entire mess.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fenderbosch,
Eric
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 10:38 AM
To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org
Subject: [rules-users] Design Question
How is your rule base configured, with identity or equality assert
behavior?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:59 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] "Not" Non-Existentia
11 matches
Mail list logo