there is already some condition sharing in drools now, based on analysing the condition text. It has some limitations but it defaintely works.
On 12/13/05, 王在祥 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have think of this issue later, and think the optimization can be done > on > some module such as the groovy-drools. Here is some ideas: > > > > 1. For a RuleBase, we can collect all the rule's condition together > > 2. We can merge f.name or f.getName() expression together, so once 1 expr > called f.getName(), it can be reused in another expression. > > 3. calculate some expression-expression relationship, such as if (f.a == > "a") then f.a != "b", or if(f.a >3) then !(f.a < 2). > > > > It looks to do such optimization, it is possible but still require a lot > of > work, maybe somebody have the time can do it. > > > > > 2005/12/13, Michael Neale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > in that particular example, in the one rule it is moot as only one > > condition > > has to be false. > > > > But that is an interesting optimisation - for normal declarative rules - > > we > > would have to tell the engine that one condition implies the other. I am > > not > > sure if there are any existing optimisations that provide this without > > asking for more information from the rule author (which would be a bit > > error > > prone). > > > > Go ahead and do a Proof of concept if you think it would help prove or > > disprove. > > > > Michael. > > > > > > > > > > On 12/6/05, 王在祥 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I am a newer to drools, and i find that drools dont optimize the > > following > > > case: > > > > > > <rule1> > > > <condition>f.a == "this"</condition> > > > </rule> > > > > > > <rule2> > > > <condition>f.a == "that"</condition> > > > </rule> > > > > > > in my understand, if rule1.condition f.a == "this" is true, then > > > rule2.condition will be false and without a evaluation. > > > > > > Maybe we should add some support to the org.drools.spi.Condition two > > > methods: > > > 1. boolean implies(Condition other) return true if this condition > > implies > > > other condition, so when this condition eval to true, then the other > > will > > > be > > > true > > > 2. boolean impliesNot(Condition other) return true if this condition > > > implies > > > not the other condition, so when this condition eval to true, the > other > > > will > > > be false. > > > > > > also optimize the rateoo engine to avoid evaluate conditional based on > > > these > > > methods. > > > > > > Do you think so? > > > > > > > > > > >
