afaik, the right url is http://labs.jboss.com/drools
On 9/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
the site http://labs.jboss.com/jbossrules/docs returns a
404. Anybody knoqws who to contact about this?
___
rules-users mailing
Scott,
not sure if it fits your problem, but you may also consider using
dynamic saliences. Yesterday I was able to convert 3.x rules to use it
worked very well.
In my case, I have facts of different sizes (some are collections of
other facts, some are individual facts) and in some rules I need
second try...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Aug 3, 2007 9:26 PM
Subject: Performance Tuning
To: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
I am trying to improve performance on a Large DataSet, few Rules app
and came accross these two
I am trying to improve performance on a Large DataSet, few Rules app
and came accross these two properties, which by default is false:
RuleBaseConfiguration.PROPERTY_INDEX_LEFT_BETA_MEMORY
RuleBaseConfiguration.PROPERTY_HASH_ALPHA_NODES
What do they mean actually? How and when should I use them?
I am finally having some time to use collects. What I basically need
to do is to collect items from a list using a specific criteria, then
collect items from a diff list using another criteria, and finally
compare the groups collected using a 3rd criteria
Here is what I am thinking:
i :
I am working on a drools application with few rules and large number
of facts. In my first design I tried to avoid excessive joins thinking
I was helping improve performance but didnt realized that I was
actually shooting myself in the foot. I was basically creating a
single facade-fact that
I am working on a drools application with few rules and large number
of facts. In my first design I tried to avoid excessive joins thinking
I was helping improve performance but didnt realized that I was
actually shooting myself in the foot. I was basically creating a
single facade-fact that
(there is definetely a problem posting to this list)
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jul 20, 2007 7:22 AM
Subject: Fwd: [rules-users] Predicate expression effect on performance
To: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
forgive
(well, I'll keep trying)
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jul 20, 2007 1:17 AM
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Predicate expression effect on performance
To: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
(sorry, the OR was not part of the sample rule
What is the extent of the performance impact caused by using predicate
expressions?
Check( amount == $amount )
or
Check( $amt : amount - (isSameAmount($amt, $amount) )
My understanding is that once asserted the amount property will be
cached in the shadow fact, is the result of
if the Check fact changes (and the engine
knows about the change).
Note that this checking happens as you are asserting objects, not when you
fireAllRules necessarily.
On 7/20/07, Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the extent of the performance impact caused by using predicate
expressions
(each setProperty called).
-- yuri
On 6/28/07, Mark Proctor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why would doing the assert work at the end of the consequence be any
quicker than doing it during the consequence?
Mark
Yuri de Wit wrote:
I noticed that changes performed on facts asserted dynamically causes
in the current context). Then at the end of the consequence
you can iterate that list and call modify on each object. Or
alternatively don't use dynamic properties.
Mark
Yuri de Wit wrote:
I am not talking about assert, but modify. I have a dynamic fact
already asserted but now I need to perform
I noticed that changes performed on facts asserted dynamically causes
the fact to be modified right away and therefore triggering a RETE
network traversal and rule schedulings.
For apps with a large number of facts this could be a significant
scalability problem. At least in my case, I would
Sorry if this gets second posted, but it seems that the first one
didnt go through...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jun 27, 2007 8:29 PM
Subject: Dynamic JavaBeans
To: Rules Users List rules-users@lists.jboss.org
I noticed that changes
I got a ClassCastException once I ran my app with the
WorkingMemoryFileLogger attached to it. After a bit of debugging the
CCE is being thrown because for an unknown reason the column of a
Declaration is wrong: it should have been 0 like all the other
declarations on the same Fact, but it is 0
Hi,
I have to create a set of rules that group facts together based on a
dynamic criteria X basd on fact data. So I created a rule to create a
first collection for the criteria X when no collection exist. I
created a second rule to add a fact to an existing collection, but I
cant get my head
I am working on an appication that does not have many rules 40-50
rules but each rule has between 1 to 2 pages of columns and
predicates, but have thousands of facts.
Even though by using the DefaultAgendaListener I can figure the rules
that were added or removed from the agenda while fact are
I usually have thousands of facts in Working memory and at some points
I need to figure out why this or that wasnt activated or sometime I
just want to know (ad-hoc) if such and such fact is already asserted
into memory.
It would be great if I could at any point in time use a JBoss rules
console
Great.
thanks,
-- yuri
On 6/16/07, Mark Proctor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've have plans for pluggeable operators, just no time to implement
them, maybe in the next release :)
Mark
Yuri de Wit wrote:
I am using JBoss Rules 3.0.6 and in many situations I was forced to
use a Java snipped
is currently in
the working memory.
Mark
Yuri de Wit wrote:
I usually have thousands of facts in Working memory and at some points
I need to figure out why this or that wasnt activated or sometime I
just want to know (ad-hoc) if such and such fact is already asserted
into memory.
It would
the same need.
thanks,
-- yuri
On 6/16/07, Yuri de Wit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Afaik, the query api (1) does not accept parameters (this is an ad-hoc
query with inputs coming ) and (2) there is no way to issue dynamic
queries against an existing working memory.
yuri
On 6/16/07, Mark Proctor [EMAIL
22 matches
Mail list logo
