Actually I was just thinking about some stuff Edson has done. With
solvers we know the available data and ranges, right? We can use this to
order indexes, I know this was something Edson looked into - but
without training data, we couldn't make it worth while - same for
custom indexing. So we can start to incorporate those to get faster
joins for known data sets.
Mark
Geoffrey De Smet wrote:
The more I learn from JCHS (or prolog for that matter),
the more I am starting to think that this is a different way of solving.
1) JCHS/prolog looks like (or is) declarative solving.
2) Taseree is actually more hybrid, the general idea behind it is:
- Drools (declarative programming) is very easy for evaluation
but very difficult for solving.
- Local/tabu search (procedural programming) is easy for solving
but difficult for evaluation.
Both have it's disadvantages and advantages, for example:
Local search is generally faster but doesn't recognize the optimal
solution.
To me it seems they are both interesting to implement,
there must be some common ground too.
We should hold a conference call about it this weekend?
It would be a good idea to compare JCHS and Taseree on a couple of
problems, like the tt problem:
http://mat.gsia.cmu.edu/TOURN/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
