Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
On 26/05/2010 09:56, paulnnosh wrote: Hi Chaps, We currently use Jrules 5 and are looking at our options going forward. We are going to evaluate Drools alongside some other products. So far I like the look of Drools but there are a couple of things that are puzzling me... - In our Jrules implementation our BOM/XOM exposes some of our application logic so that our rules can access application code and services to make decisions and updates where necessary. I can't see how this is possible in Drools. Pojos just work out of the box, it's much simpler :) So any inserted object is a pojo and is a direct reference to the object the user inserted. Use globals (also simple pojos) for registering and accessing services. - Our ruleflows use decision tables to define which rules will run dependant upon the transaction type received. This makes assigning a rule to a single ruleflow group inappropriate as one rule could be used by many different transactions. Is it possible to create an ArrayList of rules and execute them one at a time via ruleflow action node? JRules ruleflow and Drools ruleflow are very different. In JRules each ruleflow group is a separate knowledge base and executes statelessly. Where as RuleFlow in drools is for a single knowledge base and stateful sessions. You can simulate the more traditional ilog way by using Drools Flow, and create a work item to execute some input vars against a stateless session. This way each branch can have it's own knowledge base and copy of relevant rules. Mark Many Thanks ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
Thanks Mark, very helpful. I'm about to set up a Proof of concept so I'll try it out. Due to the relatively complex nature of our ruleflows and the fact that many rules can be used by many transaction types Drools Flow sounds like it will have to be the way to go. I'm out about to dig out the flow manual;-) -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to-Drools-a-couple-of-Issues-tp844379p847740.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to give access to application services etc... I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the working memory are direct references to the actual objects inserted by the calling application, that's great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep telling you what we have already!) a number of our functions make regualr use of a large number of our core application classes. To have to insert all of these each time a ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I have concerns about the amount of working memory that would be required. Is it possible to create a reference to my application and initilise this at the start up of the server so that these classes are available to my packages without having to load them into WM each time? Many Thanks -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to-Drools-a-couple-of-Issues-tp844379p847769.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
On 27/05/2010 11:04, paulnnosh wrote: I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to give access to application services etc... I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the working memory are direct references to the actual objects inserted by the calling application, that's great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep telling you what we have already!) a number of our functions make regualr use of a large number of our core application classes. To have to insert all of these each time a ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I have concerns about the amount of working memory that would be required. Is it possible to create a reference to my application and initilise this at the start up of the server so that these classes are available to my packages without having to load them into WM each time? Globals. Mark Many Thanks ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
Pithy as usual, Mark. :) Paul, you partially mention a way to go about it: dependency injection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection The best way to do that these days is with Spring using the Inversion of Control pattern: http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/spring-framework-reference/html/ http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/spring-framework-reference/html/beans.html --- On Thu, 5/27/10, Mark Proctor mproc...@codehaus.org wrote: From: Mark Proctor mproc...@codehaus.org Subject: Re: [rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org Date: Thursday, May 27, 2010, 5:31 AM On 27/05/2010 11:04, paulnnosh wrote: I Just need clarification on the injection of POJOs to give access to application services etc... I understand the fact that POJOs inserted into the working memory are direct references to the actual objects inserted by the calling application, that's great. However, currently in Jrules (sorry to keep telling you what we have already!) a number of our functions make regualr use of a large number of our core application classes. To have to insert all of these each time a ruleset is called would soon become unwieldy and I have concerns about the amount of working memory that would be required. Is it possible to create a reference to my application and initilise this at the start up of the server so that these classes are available to my packages without having to load them into WM each time? Globals. Mark Many Thanks ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
[rules-users] Moving from Jrules to Drools a couple of Issues
Hi Chaps, We currently use Jrules 5 and are looking at our options going forward. We are going to evaluate Drools alongside some other products. So far I like the look of Drools but there are a couple of things that are puzzling me... - In our Jrules implementation our BOM/XOM exposes some of our application logic so that our rules can access application code and services to make decisions and updates where necessary. I can't see how this is possible in Drools. - Our ruleflows use decision tables to define which rules will run dependant upon the transaction type received. This makes assigning a rule to a single ruleflow group inappropriate as one rule could be used by many different transactions. Is it possible to create an ArrayList of rules and execute them one at a time via ruleflow action node? Many Thanks -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Moving-from-Jrules-to-Drools-a-couple-of-Issues-tp844379p844379.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
