ok thanks.
seems dangerous anyway ..
and you said should be possible, which is (according to what I know in
english) not really sure ?
- Mail original -
De: Davide Sottara dso...@gmail.com
À: rules-users@lists.jboss.org
Envoyé: Mercredi 9 Mai 2012 23:50:54
Objet: Re: [rules-users] Is
should as in bugs/regressions apart :)
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Is-there-a-faster-way-of-doing-this-in-Drools-tp3973888p3976439.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
I've a use case where I need to create a rule dynamically every time the user
sends a request.
My current understanding of Drools is that you need to create a
KnowledgeBuilder and then add the rules
I'm creating the KnowledgeBase as follows.
private static KnowledgeBase
You can do that step once and then reload the compiled rules from the disk,
or use guvnor which will compile the rules for you.
Cheers
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:55 PM, soumya_sd soumya...@yahoo.com wrote:
I've a use case where I need to create a rule dynamically every time the
user
sends a
salaboy wrote
You can do that step once and then reload the compiled rules from the
disk,
or use guvnor which will compile the rules for you.
Cheers
Thanks for responding so quickly. I tried using Guvnor. Do you think it will
be faster than this ? In the worse case, the rules that I
Can you explain a little bit more about your context? having completely
dynamic rules is not an usual use case, rules tends to be static because
they define the business logic that you want to apply. So please elaborate
on the context.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:07 PM, soumya_sd soumya...@yahoo.com
Could you please provide a more detailed example?
The usecase you propose is really interesting and the optimization of
something very similar is on the todo-list (@salaboy: request-when rings a
bell?)
Now, depending on your exact requirements, there could be various options,
more or less clean ;)
Davide Sottara wrote
Could you please provide a more detailed example?
The usecase you propose is really interesting and the optimization of
something very similar is on the todo-list (@salaboy: request-when rings
a bell?)
Now, depending on your exact requirements, there could be various
Users changing rules IS the correct use-case of drools (I would even say that
if rules never change, drools is likely to be worse than pure java).
What others said is changing the rules at each request by regenerating and
recompiling is not.
I can't imagine that users may change rules at each
Vincent Legendre wrote
Users changing rules IS the correct use-case of drools (I would even say
that if rules never change, drools is likely to be worse than pure java).
What others said is changing the rules at each request by regenerating
and recompiling is not.
I can't imagine that
Vincent Legendre wrote
Users changing rules IS the correct use-case of drools (I would even say
that if rules never change, drools is likely to be worse than pure java).
What others said is changing the rules at each request by regenerating
and recompiling is not.
I can't imagine that
At this point I'm designing for the worst case i.e., I'm assuming the rules
with change with every request.
Keeping a cache will work for the worst case, but will work faster for normal
(see below) cases.
You can imagine the user changing these rules in a span of less than a
minute.
If the structure of the constraints/filters the user can define remains
static, and only the values are changing, then a single rule with
parametric joins will be enough. E.g.:
Params( $cat : categorySet, $minPrice : minPrice, $maxPrice : maxPrice,
)
Product( category in $cat, price =
Vincent Legendre wrote
At this point I'm designing for the worst case i.e., I'm assuming the
rules
with change with every request.
Keeping a cache will work for the worst case, but will work faster for
normal (see below) cases.
I don't see how can a cache would work in the worse
Merely filtering a subset of data items from a collection according to
user's changing needs and whims is NOT the primary use case of a production
rule system. This kind of problem has been solved adequately and
efficiently by SQL queries or some similar DB query technique.
It is true that such
laune wrote
Merely filtering a subset of data items from a collection according to
user's changing needs and whims is NOT the primary use case of a
production
rule system. This kind of problem has been solved adequately and
efficiently by SQL queries or some similar DB query technique.
On 9 May 2012 19:52, soumya_sd soumya...@yahoo.com wrote:
laune wrote
Merely filtering a subset of data items from a collection according to
user's changing needs and whims is NOT the primary use case of a
production
rule system. This kind of problem has been solved adequately and
laune wrote
On 9 May 2012 19:52, soumya_sd lt;soumya_sd@gt; wrote:
laune wrote
Merely filtering a subset of data items from a collection according to
user's changing needs and whims is NOT the primary use case of a
production
rule system. This kind of problem has been solved
@ laune - so are you suggesting that I don't use Drools ?
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Is-there-a-faster-way-of-doing-this-in-Drools-tp3973888p3974950.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
so you are using drools to build on-the-fly queries based on user input.
You could probably do this via static rules. Since you basically have 4
variables (price, avg_user_rating, num_ratings, category), you could write
4 rules, one each that filters based on one of the 4 variables and then
I did not assume that I've seen all use cases, nor that what I am a telling is
the absolute truth. See no offense in my previous post.
Yes, I was supposing some use case of my own experience, but please note it is
the first post when you describe what you are really trying to do, ie
And I did not see all pending posts ...
By reading them, there is another fact that lead to don't use drools.
You said that you query a distant DB. So, if you write rules to filter your
data, you will have first to get ALL data from your distant DB, add ALL data in
the drools WM, and only then
Vincent Legendre wrote
I did not assume that I've seen all use cases, nor that what I am a
telling is the absolute truth. See no offense in my previous post.
No offense taken at all. In fact, I would like to thank you for asking
important questions. These questions help me validate my
Vincent Legendre wrote
And I did not see all pending posts ...
By reading them, there is another fact that lead to don't use drools.
You said that you query a distant DB. So, if you write rules to filter
your data, you will have first to get ALL data from your distant DB, add
ALL data in
... OR load everything into a WM and then apply these dynamic rules.
Beware, I am not sure whether we can add/remove rules in an existing session (I
don't think so but I may be wrong).
Basically, a WM is built from a kBase, not the inverse ...
So you will have to recompile rules, that re-add
Vincent Legendre wrote
... OR load everything into a WM and then apply these dynamic rules.
Beware, I am not sure whether we can add/remove rules in an existing
session (I don't think so but I may be wrong).
Basically, a WM is built from a kBase, not the inverse ...
So you will have to
@Vincent: it should indeed be possible to hot-plug rules directly into a
knowledge BASE (meaning all sessions derived from that KB will be affected:
existing facts will be matched against the new rules). More typically, this
is done using a Knowledge Agent to manage the Knowledge Base.
Whether
@Vincent: it should indeed be possible to hot-plug rules directly into a
knowledge BASE (meaning all sessions derived from that KB will be affected:
existing facts will be matched against the new rules). More typically, this
is done using a Knowledge Agent to manage the Knowledge Base.
Whether
You can compile Java by invoking javac from a Java program
and load and execute the resulting class file. 1.7 has an API for
calling the Java compiler.
-W
On 9 May 2012 20:21, soumya_sd soumya...@yahoo.com wrote:
laune wrote
On 9 May 2012 19:52, soumya_sd soumya_sd@ wrote:
I didn't
29 matches
Mail list logo
