Wangwei,
One simple test I would like you to try is to change your rule from this:
alarmdefine(alarmreason==reason, alarmlevel!=level)
To this:
alarmdefine(alarmlevel!=level, alarmreason==reason)
Let me know if you can run the same test this way.
Thank you,
Edson
Edson Tirelli wrote:
> Wangwei,
>
>Just to be sure I understood your code, do you really want to call
>workingMemory.fireAllRules() inside your for loop? I assume when you run
>the same code in Jess you call "(run)" the same number of times, right?
>We know we are still slower then Jess as we have some overheads that
>Jess doesn't face (to not speak in our 6 months old compared to Jess
>years old). We, of course, are working on improving the performance.
>But, what we are seeing is, for instance, in informal benchmarks we ran,
>like Manners with 64 guests, Jess is 3 times faster. If we raise to 128
>guests, we scale better and Jess is only 2 times faster.
>Also, the way you wrote the rule makes possible for Drools to use its
>indexed join optimizations, so it is the best scenario. It is really
>amazing the performance difference. If you can, would you please send us
>the whole invocation code, in a way we can run here and see what is
>being optimized and what is not? Also, it would be good to have the jess
>code, just to be sure we are comparing apples to apples.
>
>Thanks, I do appreciate.
>
>Edson
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
>>Thanks, the whole rule file:
>>
>>package com.datangmobile.rules
>>
>>import com.datangmobile.rules.alarmdefine;
>>import com.datangmobile.rules.alarm;
>>
>>rule "alarmdefine"
>> no-loop true
>> when
>> #conditions
>> alarm(reason:alarmreason, level:alarmlevel)
>> alarmdefine(alarmreason==reason, alarmlevel!=level)
>> then
>> #actions
>> alarm.setCounter();
>>end
>>
>>alarmdefine object:
>>package com.datangmobile.rules;
>>
>>public class alarmdefine {
>>
>> private int alarmreason;
>> private int alarmlevel;
>> private int objtype;
>> private int alarmtype;
>>
>> public int getAlarmlevel() {
>> return alarmlevel;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmlevel(int alarmlevel) {
>> this.alarmlevel = alarmlevel;
>> }
>> public int getAlarmreason() {
>> return alarmreason;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmreason(int alarmreason) {
>> this.alarmreason = alarmreason;
>> }
>> public int getAlarmtype() {
>> return alarmtype;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmtype(int alarmtype) {
>> this.alarmtype = alarmtype;
>> }
>> public int getObjtype() {
>> return objtype;
>> }
>> public void setObjtype(int objtype) {
>> this.objtype = objtype;
>> }
>>}
>>
>>alarm object:
>>package com.datangmobile.rules;
>>
>>public class alarm {
>>
>> private int alarmreason;
>> private int alarmlevel;
>> private int objtype;
>> private int alarmtype;
>> private String dn;
>>
>> static private int counter = 0;
>>
>> public int getAlarmlevel() {
>> return alarmlevel;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmlevel(int alarmlevel) {
>> this.alarmlevel = alarmlevel;
>> }
>> public int getAlarmreason() {
>> return alarmreason;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmreason(int alarmreason) {
>> this.alarmreason = alarmreason;
>> }
>> public int getAlarmtype() {
>> return alarmtype;
>> }
>> public void setAlarmtype(int alarmtype) {
>> this.alarmtype = alarmtype;
>> }
>> public String getDn() {
>> return dn;
>> }
>> public void setDn(String dn) {
>> this.dn = dn;
>> }
>> public int getObjtype() {
>> return objtype;
>> }
>> public void setObjtype(int objtype) {
>> this.objtype = objtype;
>> }
>>
>> static public void setCounter(){
>>
>> counter++;
>> }
>>
>> static public int getCounter(){
>> return counter;
>> }
>>}
>>
>>
>>
>>can you provide your objects that you are using, and the whole rule file?
>>
>>On 4/26/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dear user group:
>>>
>>> I have a queston about the performance of drools3.0.
>>> My only one rule is:
>>>
>>> rule "alarmdefine"
>>> no-loop true
>>> when
>>> #conditions
>>> alarm(reason:alarmreason, level:alarmlevel)
>>> alarmdefine(alarmreason==reason, alarmlevel!=level)
>>> then
>>> #actions
>>> alarm.setCounter();?
>>> end
>>>
>>> My eviroment: eclipse3.2M5, jdk1.4.2-03
>>> Testcode is :
>>>
>>> for(int i=1; i<1000; i++)
>>> {
>>> alarm malarm = new alarm();
>>> malarm.setAlarmreason(i);
>>> malarm.setAlarmlevel(1);
>>> malarm.setObjtype(1);
>>> malarm.setAlarmtype(1);
>>> workingMemory.assertObject( malarm );
>>> workingMemory.fireAllRules();
>>> }
>>>
>>> when alarmdefine exist 50000 record, execute time is 20s
>>> when alarmdefine exist 5000 recode, execute time is 2s
>>>
>>> Then I have done the same test with JESS, the rule is:
>>>
>>> (defrule alarm-cleared-all
>>> (alarm (alarmreason ?a) (alarmlevel ?x) )
>>> (alarmdef (alarmreason ?a) (alarmlevel ?y&:(<> ?y ?x)))
>>> =>
>>> (call alarm setCounter)
>>> )
>>>
>>> when alarmdefine exist 50000 record, execute time is only 0.2s
>>>
>>> Great difference! Why? What can I do?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Wangwei
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
