|
List Info
Thread: Re: Rules Engine always running
|
|
| Re: Rules Engine always running |
|
2007-03-28 13:21:16 |
|
; Yes, that is standard approach.
Just don't share the same working memory among multiple threads (seems you are not doing that, so just reinforcing). The rule base may be shared, no problem.
; []s
Edson
2007/3/28, Jones, Alan R < alan.r.jones boeing.com">alan.r.jonesboeing.com>:
This is actually very close to the approach I am going to
try:
The caching is replaced by an object
representing/encapsulating a given rulebase created as a new/separate thread. A
reference to said object is registered (cached?). When a Fact comes along, the
appropriate rulebase/object is looked up and the fact is fed to it (the object
has a method that takes the fact and asserts it into a new working memory),
then the object fires the rule. Does this approach make
sense?
Thanks,
aj
From: Edson Tirelli [mailto: tirellipost.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">tirellipost.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 11:03 AM
To: Rules Users
List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Rules Engine always
running
Alan,
If you have different sets of
rules that you want to apply in different circunstances, you can compile and
cache each of this sets as a rulebase (note that the set may contain a single
rule).
Then, for each fact that arrives, you decide which is the
rulebase that applies to it, create a working memory for that rulebase, assert
the fact, run the rule and throw the working memory away (as, you mentioned you
don't want this working memory anymore).
You can, of
course, work with a single rulebase and keep adding and removing rules from it,
but it will be more expensive to handle that for the use case you
described.
If you are able to detail your use case, we may
be able to help you more.
Regards,
Edson
2007/3/28, Jones, Alan R < alan.r.jonesboeing.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">alan.r.jonesboeing.com>:
Yes, some
of these things are being considered. Thanks for your input , it has been
helpful!
aj
From: Anstis, Michael (M.)
[mailto: manstis1ford.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">manstis1ford.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:12 AM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: RE: [rules-users]
Rules Engine always running
I assume
rules are dynamically added to the Rulebase and that there is not a static set
of rules associated with each application release?
I believe new rules can be dynamically added to the
existing Rulebase - whether existing WM's inherit the new rules I don't know.
Agenda Groups could provide the control of which groups of rules
fire.
Also, if
you retain FactHandles to all asserted Facts depending upon the decision made
by the component the legacy Facts can be retracted before the new rule is
activated.
I assume
you'll also have some "Rule life-cycle" control in place? Either removing
rules from a Rulebase (I believe to be possible) or destroying redundant WM's
(as per your proposal).
Sorry,
this doesn't add much more value ;- although input from more experienced
users is welcomed.
Cheers,
Mike
From: rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org [mailto: rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of
Jones, Alan R
Sent: 28 March 2007 15:29
To: Rules
Users List
Subject: RE: [rules-users] Rules Engine always
running
Mike,
Thanks
for you rresponse, however I'm not sure based on what we are wanting to
do that we should use a single working memory. The proposed
approach is:
a rule
has been added to the rule base, then a Fact (object) comes along and we
instantiate a working memory and fire all rules relative to this working
memory. The outcome from Drools is evaluated by another sw component,
and it is decided to try a different rule with a given
Fact.
So, a
new rule, rule #2, comes along with slightly different specifics on
what it is supposed to match, so it is added to the rule base. Then, Fact
#2 comes down the pipeline. A new working memory #2 is
instantiated against the existing rulebase, Fact #2 is asserted, and
fireAllRules() called against the working memory #2.
The
desired behavior is that only rule #2 is actually kicked into action
(against Fact #2), since the first rule and fact is done with. We don't want
the previous rules/facts in the rule base operating any
longer.
Maybe I
just don't know enough about the proper application of rules when solving
particular problems to ask the right questions -- my task is to expose JBoss
rules as a service so I'm trying to understand a bit
about ;it's operation.
Thanks,
aj
--------------------------------------------
Alan R Jones
Boeing S&IS Mission
Systems
Denver
Engineering Center (BDEC)
303.307.3415
From: Anstis, Michael (M.) [mailto: manstis1ford.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">manstis1ford.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:23 AM
To: Rules Users
List
Subject: RE: [rules-users] Rules Engine always
running
Hi
Alan,
A
working memory is in essence always availablerunning whilst there is a
reference to it; other than the "main" thread (on which your public static
void main executes) you don't need to use other threads (but this obviously
depends upon what exactly you're trying to achieve). The Rulebase can
contain all of your production rules (in fact this is probably the
recommended approach as, assuming some rules share ;a common
pattern, the resulting RETE network will be optimised); and you can
feed incoming objects (Facts in JBoss Rules terms) into one working memory
created from the one Rulebase. As objects are asserted patterns (LHS)
defining the rules are matched and, once fully matched, rules are activated
for execution (RHS). Unfortunately I don't have any experience of JBoss Rules in a
multi-threaded environment.
For example /font>
public static void main(String args[]) {
Rulebase rb =
loadRuleBase();
WorkingMemory wm =
rb.newWorkingMemory();
while (!exit()) {
Collection c =
getObjectsFromWherever();
assertObjectsIntoWorkingMemory(c,
wm);
wm.fireAllRules();
;
try {
;
Thread.sleep(1000);
;
}
;
catch(InterruptedException
ie) {
}
}
}
With kind regards,
Mike
From: rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org [mailto:
rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">rules-users-bounceslists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of
Jones, Alan R
Sent: 27 March 2007 19:05
To: Rules
Users List
Subject: [rules-users] Rules Engine always
running
Kind
of new to JBoss Rules...I'm trying to fiigure out from what i have read so
far if the following scenario is possible:
1.
Start up an instance of a working memory (say, with dummy rule?) and keep
it running, feeding it data objects to operate on from time to
time.
2. As
needed, kick off as many instance of working memory within the single rule
base (in a separate thread) and keep them going as in step
1
The
idea is to keep the rules engine running constantly, but kick off separate
working-memory threads for the injection of various incoming rule
sets and the objects those rule sets work on as needed. Can anyone provide
some insight to this? Pointers to examples, perhaps?
Alan
J. ;
_______________________________________________
rules-users
mailing list
rules-userslists.jboss.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">rules-userslists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
Software Engineer
- JBoss Rules Core Developer
;Office: +55 11
3124-6000
Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
JBoss, a
division of Red Hat www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
lists.jboss.org">rules-userslists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
;Office: +55 11 3124-6000
;Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
JBoss, a division of Red Hat www.jboss.com
|
| RE: Rules Engine always running |
 
United States |
2007-03-28 13:25:39 |
|
| Thanks for your help!
aj
--------------------------------------------
Alan R Jones
Boeing S&IS Mission
Systems
Denver
Engineering Center (BDEC)
303.307.3415
Yes, that is standard approach.
Just
don't share the same working memory among multiple threads (seems you are not
doing that, so just reinforcing). The rule base may be shared, no
problem.
[]s
Edson
2007/3/28, Jones, Alan R <boeing.com">alan.r.jonesboeing.com>:
This is
actually very close to the approach I am going to try:
The
caching is replaced by an object representing/encapsulating a given rulebase
created as a new/separate thread. A reference to said object is registered
(cached?). When a Fact comes along, the appropriate rulebase/object is looked
up and the fact is fed to it (the object has a method that takes the fact and
asserts it into a new working memory), then the object fires the
rule. Does this approach make sense?
Thanks,
aj
Alan,
If you have different sets
of rules that you want to apply in different circunstances, you can compile
and cache each of this sets as a rulebase (note that the set may contain a
single rule).
Then, for each fact that arrives, you decide
which is the rulebase that applies to it, create a working memory for that
rulebase, assert the fact, run the rule and throw the working memory away (as,
you mentioned you don't want this working memory anymore).
You can, of course, work with a single rulebase and keep
adding and removing rules from it, but it will be more expensive to handle
that for the use case you described.
If you are able to
detail your use case, we may be able to help you more.
Regards,
; Edson
2007/3/28, Jones, Alan R <boeing.com"
target=_blank>alan.r.jonesboeing.com>:
Yes,
some of these things are being considered. Thanks for your input , it has
been helpful!
aj
I assume
rules are dynamically added to the Rulebase and that there is not a static
set of rules associated with each application release?
I believe new rules can be dynamically added to the
existing Rulebase - whether existing WM's inherit the new rules I don't
know. Agenda Groups could provide the control of which groups of rules
fire.
Also, if
you retain FactHandles to all asserted Facts depending upon the decision
made by the component the legacy Facts can be retracted before the new rule
is activated.
I assume
you'll also have some "Rule life-cycle" control in place? Either removing
rules from a Rulebase (I believe to be possible) or destroying redundant
WM's (as per your proposal).
Sorry,
this doesn't add much more value ;- although input from more experienced
users is welcomed.
Cheers,
Mike
Mike,
Thanks
for you rresponse, however I'm not sure based on what we are wanting
to do that we should use a single working memory. The proposed
approach is:
a rule
has been added to the rule base, then a Fact (object) comes along and we
instantiate a working memory and fire all rules relative to this working
memory. The outcome from Drools is evaluated by another sw component,
and it is decided to try a different rule with a given
Fact.
So, a
new rule, rule #2, comes along with slightly different specifics on
what it is supposed to match, so it is added to the rule base. Then, Fact
#2 comes down the pipeline. A new working memory #2 is
instantiated against the existing rulebase, Fact #2 is asserted, and
fireAllRules() called against the working memory #2.
The
desired behavior is that only rule #2 is actually kicked into action
(against Fact #2), since the first rule and fact is done with. We don't
want the previous rules/facts in the rule base operating any
longer.
Maybe
I just don't know enough about the proper application of rules when
solving particular problems to ask the right questions -- my task is to
expose JBoss rules as a service so I'm trying to
understand a bit about ;it's operation.
Thanks,
aj
--------------------------------------------
Alan R
Jones
Boeing
S&IS Mission Systems
Denver Engineering Center (BDEC)
303.307.3415
Hi
Alan,
A
working memory is in essence always availablerunning whilst there is a
reference to it; other than the "main" thread (on which your public static
void main executes) you don't need to use other threads (but this
obviously depends upon what exactly you're trying to achieve). The
Rulebase can contain all of your production rules (in fact this is
probably the recommended approach as, assuming some rules share ;a
common pattern, the resulting RETE network will be optimised); and
you can feed incoming objects (Facts in JBoss Rules terms) into one
working memory created from the one Rulebase. As objects are asserted
patterns (LHS) defining the rules are matched and, once fully matched,
rules are activated for execution (RHS). Unfortunately I don't have any experience of JBoss
Rules in a multi-threaded environment.
For example/FONT>
public static void main(String args[]) {
Rulebase rb =
loadRuleBase();
WorkingMemory wm =
rb.newWorkingMemory();
while (!exit()) {
Collection c =
getObjectsFromWherever();
assertObjectsIntoWorkingMemory(c,
wm);
wm.fireAllRules();
;
try {
;
Thread.sleep(1000);
;
}
;
catch(InterruptedException
ie) {
}
}
}
With kind regards,
Mike
Kind
of new to JBoss Rules...I'm trying to fiigure out from what i have read
so far if the following scenario is possible:
1.
Start up an instance of a working memory (say, with dummy rule?) and
keep it running, feeding it data objects to operate on from time to
time.
2.
As needed, kick off as many instance of working memory within the single
rule base (in a separate thread) and keep them going as in step
1
The
idea is to keep the rules engine running constantly, but kick off
separate working-memory threads for the injection of various
incoming rule sets and the objects those rule sets work on as needed.
Can anyone provide some insight to this? Pointers to examples,
perhaps?
Alan
J. ;
_______________________________________________
rules-users
mailing list
lists.jboss.org"
target=_blank>rules-userslists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
Software
Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
;Office: +55 11
3124-6000
;Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
JBoss, a
division of Red Hat www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users
mailing list
lists.jboss.org">rules-userslists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
Software Engineer
- JBoss Rules Core Developer
;Office: +55 11
3124-6000
Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151
JBoss, a
division of Red Hat www.jboss.com
|
[1-2]
|
|