10/30/2019 Rules Based Engine Software
A metadata driven rulesenginebased on Java. This engine will allow you to configure your own domain specific metadata. It provides features like dynamic rule definitions, chaining of rules and is very easy to define rules.
Download the.pdf of the chapter here. A business rules engine (BRE) is a software application or a system that is designed to manage and enforce business rules based on a specified stimulus, for example, an event of attribute value changes.
Rules engine have their place and the above is just another option if you have rules on a project that you may want to deploy dynamically for very simplified situations that don't require a rules engine. BASICALLY do NOT use a rules engine if you have a simple ruleset and can have a groovy interface instead.just as dynamically deployable. A classic example of a rule-based system is the domain-specific expert system that uses rules to make deductions or choices. For example, an expert system might help a doctor choose the correct diagnosis based on a cluster of symptoms, or select tactical moves to play a game.
Related:Business Rules Engine - Moonlight Engine Cheat Engine - Engine Cheat Engine - Rules Rules - Gd Rules Poll
Pages : <1 | 2 | 3
Active3 years, 1 month ago
I have a pretty decent list of the advantages of using a Rules Engine, as well as some reasons to use them, what I need is a list of the reasons why you should NOT use a Rules Engine
The best I have so far is this:
Rules engines are not really intended to handle workflow or process executions nor are workflow engines or process management tools designed to do rules.
Any other big reasons why you should not use them?
closed as primarily opinion-based by casperOneJul 19 '13 at 10:59
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
10 Answers
I get very nervous when I see people using very large rule sets (e.g., on the order of thousands of rules in a single rule set). This often happens when the rules engine is a singleton sitting in the center of the enterprise in the hope that keeping rules DRY will make them accessible to many apps that require them. I would defy anyone to tell me that a Rete rules engine with that many rules is well-understood. I'm not aware of any tools that can check to ensure that conflicts don't exist.
I think partitioning rules sets to keep them small is a better option. Aspects can be a way to share a common rule set among many objects.
I prefer a simpler, more data driven approach wherever possible.
I will give 2 examples from personal experience where using a Rules Engine was a bad idea, maybe that will help:-
Lesson: They are called 'Business Rules' for a reason, do not use rules when you cannot design a system that can be easily maintained/understood by Business users.
Lesson: Requirements tend to change a lot during initial release changes and do not warrant usage of rules. Use rules when your business changes often (not requirements). Eg:- A software that does your taxes will change every year as taxation laws change and usage of rules is an excellent idea. Release 1.0 of an web app will change often as users identify new requirements but will stabilize over time. Do not use rules as an alternative to code deploy.
Number of permitted concurrent streams will vary based on the terms of your subscription. Watch yu gi oh online free. Cloud DVR storage space is limited. Pricing, channels, features, content, and compatible devices subject to change.
I'm a big fan of Business Rules Engines, since it can help you make your life much easier as a programmer. One of the first experiences I've had while working on a Data Warehouse project was to find Stored Procedures containing complicated CASE structures stretching over entire pages. It was a nightmare to debug, since it was very difficult to understand the logic applied in such long CASE structures, and to determine if you have an overlapping between a rule at page 1 of the code and another from page 5. Overall, we had more than 300 such rules embedded in the code.
When we've received a new development requirement, for something called Accounting Destination, which was involving treating more than 3000 rules, i knew something had to change. Back then I've been working on a prototype which later on become the parent of what now is a Custom Business Rule engine, capable of handling all SQL standard operators. Initially we've been using Excel as an authoring tool and , later on, we've created an ASP.net application which will allow the Business Users to define their own business rules, without the need of writing code. Now the system works fine, with very few bugs, and contains over 7000 rules for calculating this Accounting Destination. I don't think such scenario would have been possible by just hard-coding. And the users are pretty happy that they can define their own rules without IT becoming their bottleneck.
Still, there are limits to such approach:
More details on this topic can be found on a post I've written: http://dwhbp.com/post/2011/10/30/Implementing-a-Business-Rule-Engine.aspx
Overall, the biggest advantage of using a Business Rule Engines is that it allows the users to take back control over the Business Rule definitions and authoring, without the need of going to the IT department each time they need to modify something. It also the reduces the workload over IT development teams, which can now focus on building stuff with more added value.
Cheers,
Nicolae
The one poit I've noticed to be 'the double edged sword' is:
placing the logic in hands of non technical staff
I've seen this work great, when you have one or two multidisciplinary geniuses on the non technical side, but I've also seen the lack of technicity leading to bloat, more bugs, and in general 4x the development/maintenance cost.
Thus you need to consider your user-base seriously.
I thought Alex Papadimoulis's article was quite insightful: http://thedailywtf.com/articles/soft_coding.aspx
Car Engine Software
It's not comprehensive, but he's got some good points.
GREAT article on when not to use a rules Engine..(as well as when to use one)..
Another option is if you have a linear set of rules that only apply once in any order to get an outcome is to create a groovy interface and have developers write and deploy these new rules. The advantage is that it is wickedly fast because normally you would pass the hibernate session OR jdbc session as well as any parameters so you have access to all your apps data but in an efficient manner. With a fact list, there can be alot of looping/matching that really can slow the system down...It's another way to avoid a rules engine and be able to be deployed dynamically(yes, our groovy rules were deployed in a database and we had no recursion..it either met the rule or it didn't). It is just another option...oh and one more benefit is not learning rules syntax for incoming developers. They have to learn some groovy but that is very close to java so the learning curve is much better.
It really depends on your context. Rules engine have their place and the above is just another option if you have rules on a project that you may want to deploy dynamically for very simplified situations that don't require a rules engine.
BASICALLY do NOT use a rules engine if you have a simple ruleset and can have a groovy interface instead...just as dynamically deployable and new developers joining your team can learn it faster than the drools language.(but that's my opinion)
Rules Based Engine Software Download
In my experience, rules engines work best when the following are true:
Engine Software Twitter
If any of these four traits are missing, you still might find a rules engine works for you, but every time I've tried it with even 1 missing, I've run into trouble. Spongebob season 9 episode 1 cast.
That's certainly a good start. The other thing with rules engines is that some things are well-understood, deterministic, and straight-forward. Payroll withholding is (or use to be) like that. You could express it as rules that would be resolved by a rules engine, but you could express the same rules as a fairly simple table of values.
So, workflow engines are good when you're expressing a longer-term process that will have persistent data. Rules engines can do a similar thing, but you have to do a lot of added complexity.
Rules Based Engine Software For Mac
Rules engines are good when you have complicated knowledge bases and need search. Rules engines can resolve complicated issues, and can be adapted quickly to changing situations, but impose a lot of complexity on the base implementation.
Many decision algorithms are simple enough to express as a simple table-driven program without the complexity implied by a real rules engine.
I would strongly recommend business rules engines like Drools as open source or Commercial Rules Engine such as LiveRules.
I don't really understand some points such as :
a) business people needs to understand business very well, or; b) disagreement on business people don't need to know the rule.
For me, as a people just touching BRE, the benefit of BRE is so called to let system adapt to business change, hence it's focused on adaptive of change.
Does it matter if the rule set up at time x is different from the rule set up at time y because of: a) business people don't understand business, or; b) business people don't understand rules? Pega Rule EngineRules Based Engine Software ReviewsNot the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged rule-engine or ask your own question.Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |