For me velocity is the priority. I don't care about the rest, my users
will not use the engine directly, they will have an easier interface.
Just another question. Is it posible to have a fact database and a rule
database and at the end perform a query. Instead of check everything each
time I add something to the database ???
Database = repository = data = classes = facts = ...
Thanks,
Marc
bob mcwhirter writes:
> > We wanted that the user will be able to define his owns rules, the facts
> > will be represented in rdf (this will be our model, but is easy to
> > transform to ruleml). Our main problem is the velocity, we need a very fast
> > rule engine, so we will try with different engines, maybe we will develop
> > our own engine, we still don't know it.
>
> I haven't benchmarked drools at all against JEOPS, Jess or JRules.
>
> I imagine that possibly drools will be slow in comparison, due to
> the run-time interpreted nature of the condition matching and action
> execution.
>
> Quick straw poll:
>
> What's the most important factor to each of you?
>
> a) Speed of matches (ie, how long does assertObject(...)
> block, when the asserted object does and does not create
> a rule match).
>
> b) Ease of use.
>
> c) Run-time extensibility.
>
> d) Other? (Please specify)
>
> Note that possibly many times, an assertObject(...) call will simply
> drop an object in, but not actually create a match. Sometimes it will,
> and then the Action portion of the match will take the most time.
>
> Since we use Rete (actually, Rete-OO), we are following the efficient
> algorithm for matching, and avoid execution redundant predicates
> repeatedly.
>
> Anyhow, folks? Which do you consider the most important?
>
> -bob
>
_______________________________________________
drools-interest mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/drools-interest
