Decision Engine

12 décembre 2013
Le nouveau moteur de règles dans
Operational Decision Manager 8.5.1:
Et si on passait à la vitesse supérieure!
Antony Viaud,
Product Manager ODM
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Motivations pour un nouveau moteur de règles dans ODM
 Besoins accrus en performance:
– Niveau élevé de TPS pour certains applicatifs
– Temps de réponse de quelques millisecondes
– Simulations basées sur des millions d’entrées
 Besoin de mieux utiliser les ressources matérielles:
– Serveurs hautement disponibles
– Consommation mémoire réduite ou limitée
– Maximiser l’utilisation des CPUs et cores
 Une technologie de moteur de règle qui atteint ses limites
– Conçue il y a 15 ans
– Etendue au fils des besoins (ruleflow, table de décision, sequential…)
– Optimisée
2
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Transformer ces défis en opportunité
 Investissement massif sur une nouvelle génération de moteur de règles:
– Réécriture du processus de compilation et d’exécution
– Meilleurs temps d’exécution
– Meilleure scalabilité
– Consommation mémoire réduite
– Temps de chargement très réduits
– Architecture ouverte aux extensions
 Introduction progressive dans ODM
– Nouveau moteur appelé « moteur de décision » / « decision engine »
– Compatible avec le moteur actuel (« classic rule engine »)
– Fortement testé
– Chemin trivial de migration
3
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Decision Engine Progressive Introduction in ODM
 In ODM for z/OS V8.0.1 (Nov 2012)
– Supported in zRES
 In ODM for z/OS V8.5 (June 2013)
– Extended to RES running on WAS on z/OS
– Build and deploy from Decision Center
 In ODM V8.5.1 (Nov 29, 2013)
– Extended support to distributed systems
– Additional integration, mainly in RES and Rule Designer
 Next (roadmap)
4
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Sources of improvements
5
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Compilation processes
Classic rule engine
Business
Rules
Authoring
Compilation
Low level
textual rules
IRL
Deployment
Ruleset
archive
Parsing
Loading
Compilation and
optimization
Partial bytecode
generation
Costly parsing of IRL rules
Heavy processing during ruleset loading,
each and every time
Only a partial bytecode generation
Java class loading
Execution
6
Executable rules
Ruleflows still interpreted
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Compilation processes
Decision Engine
Business
Rules
Authoring
Deployment
Compilation
Decision algorithm
optimization
Optimization during
ruleset generation
Intermediate code
generation
Intermediate object
oriented code generation
Ruleset
Archive
Loading
Bytecode
generation
Java class loading
Execution
7
Java bytecode generation
Rules and ruleflows fully
transformed into Java bytecode
Executable rules
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Compilation processes
Authoring
Decision Engine
(with intermediate code)
Decision Engine
(with Java bytecode)
Business
Rules
Business
Rules
Compilation
Compilation
Decision algorithm
optimization
Deployment
Intermediate code
generation
Optimization during
ruleset generation
Java bytecode
generation (needs XOM)
Ruleset
Archive
Loading
Bytecode
generation
Java class loading
Execution
8
Decision algorithm
optimization
Bytecode
generation
Ruleset
archive
Super fast Java
bytecode loading.
Java class loading
Executable rules
Executable rules
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Comparison between engines compilation processes
Classic rule engine
Authoring
Deployment
Loading
Execution
9
Decision Engine
Decision Engine
(with intermediate code)
(with Java bytecode)
Business
Rules
Business
Rules
Business
Rules
Compilation
Compilation
Compilation
Low level
textual rules
IRL
Decision algorithm
optimization
Decision algorithm
optimization
Ruleset
archive
Intermediate code
generation
Bytecode
generation
Parsing
Ruleset
Archive
Compilation and
optimization
Bytecode
generation
Java class loading
Partial bytecode
generation
Java class loading
Executable rules
Java class loading
Executable rules
Ruleset
archive
Executable rules
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Additional redesign in the decision engine
 Decision table now treated with a dedicated artifact
 Ruleflows are fully compiled
 Legacy thread synchronization points removed
 Full rewrite means many opportunities to optimize the code.
10
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Decision engine benefits
11
© 2013 IBM Corporation
How to measure the gains
 Configuration:
– Server
– Client
IBM x3550 M2 - Intel ® Xeon ® CPU X5570 @ 2.93 Ghz
2 x 4 cores x 2 threads ( 16 execution threads)
52 GB RAM.
Microsoft ® Windows® Server 2008
WebSphere Application Server 8.5.0.2 (64 bit)
IBM JVM Java 7 SR4
JVM Heap size from 1GB to 8GB
DB2 Enterprise 9.7.0.441 (64-bit version)
 Rule Benchmark
– Eight sizes of ruleset from 300 to 14560 rules
– From 80 to 2000 rules fired per execution.
– Decision tables only
– Ruleflow of 5 rule tasks
– Java or XML XOM
– JSE, Web Service or REST invocation
 Acronyms:
– DE: Decision Engine
– CRE: Classic Rule Engine
12
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Rule Execution Server - decision engine V8.5.1 Highlights
 Increased Execution Throughput:
– Average improvement of 185% in average vs CRE (V8.5.0)
– 29000 TPS on a 500 rule ruleset with sequential on Java XOM.
– 37000 TPS on a 300 rule ruleset with Fastpath on Java XOM.
 Shorter Loading time:
– Up to 15x times faster than CRE with large rulesets
 Less Memory consumption :
– 1GB Heap (64 bits) recommended vs 4GB with CRE (64bits)
– DE Java bytecode uses between 8x and 32x times less memory than CRE.
(JSE test)
 Increased Scalability
– DE is much more scalable than CRE
13
© 2013 IBM Corporation
POJO RES Performance
Sequential execution on JAVA XOM
V8.5.0 Vs V8.5.1.0
% gain
+110%
+104%
+228%
+279%
+280%
+386%
+384%
+331%
35000
29237
30000
29212
25000
22397
TPS
20000
15000
13920
14350
10983
10000
6831
5159
5000
2895
1357
3667
754
2715
561
2253
523
0
300
500
1000
2912
5824
8736
11648
14560
JAVA XOM V8.5.0 (CRE)
Ruleset size
14
JAVA XOM V8.5.1.0 (DE Java bytecode)
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Web Service Performance HTDS SOAP on XML XOM
Sequential execution
V8.5.0 Vs V8.5.1.0
% gain
+37%
+47%
5379
5492
+161%
+243%
+140%
+77%
+82%
+30%
6000
5000
4360
3917
TPS
4000
3737
3000
2428
2000
1670
991
707
1000
412
545
309
218
396
203 264
0
300
500
1000
2912
5824
Ruleset size
8736
11648
14560
XML XOM V8.5.0 (CRE)
XML XOM V8.5.1.0 (DE Java bytecode)
15
© 2013 IBM Corporation
16
© 2013 IBM Corporation
17
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Minimum Heap Size (MB)
for sequential execution (JSE)
Java XOM
CRE
DE Intermediate code
DE Java bytecode
Ruleset size
300
500
1000
2912
5824
8736
11648
14560
0
32
16
4
32
16
4
4
64
8
16
32
16
128
128
200
192
256
256
300
400
20
64
100
Heap Size (MB)
16
256
384
500
512
600
640
700
18
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Rule Execution Server V8.5.1 Release Highlights
Benchmark Scenarios (relatives to 8.5.0, 8.0.1, 7.5.0.1 and 7.1.1.1 GAs)
 Rule Execution Server throughput improvement : comparison of V8.5.1 with Decision Engine
(DE Java bytecode) Vs. previous releases using the Classic Rule Engine :
– Versus 8.5.0 (*)
• Between 10% and 400% faster (sequential)
• Average improvement of 180% for sequential, 75% for Fastpath
– Versus 8.0.1 (**)
• Between 25% and 400% faster (sequential)
• Average improvement factor of 190% for sequential, 90% for Fastpath
– Versus 7.5.0.1
• Between 60% and 570% faster (sequential)
• Average improvement of 250% for sequential, 125% for Fastpath
– Versus 7.1.1.1
• Between 95% and 800% faster (sequential)
• Average improvement of 335% for sequential, 160% for Fastpath
(*) : addition of REST support have been integrated in statistics
(**) : addition of Java XOM for HTDS (SOAP) support have been integrated in statistics
19
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Decision Center & Rule Designer V8.5.1 Highlights
 Decision Center V8.5.1 improvements using the new Decision Engine
(compared to Classic Rule Engine)
– Full Build with Decision Engine is much faster than with Classic
Rule Engine
• Versus 8.5.0 / 8.0.1 : between 125% and 175% faster than Classic Rule
Engine
• Versus 7.1.1.1 : between 420% and 640% faster than Classic Rule Engine
– Partial Build to execution : similar performance between the two engines.
 Rule Designer improvements using the new Decision Engine
– Full Build : Decision Engine is between 100% to 180% faster than
Classic Rule Engine
– Partial Build to execution : similar performance between the 3 use cases
(CRE, DE Intermediate code, DE Java bytecode), however DE Java
bytecode is recommended for production use.
20
© 2013 IBM Corporation
How to leverage the decision
engine
21
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Selecting the decision engine for compilation
 Choose build mode (in rule project properties)
– Classic rule engine is the default mode
– User can revert to previous mode
– No change to the rule content
 Rule Designer compiles rule artifacts into a ruleset archive (.dsar)
– contains compiled and optimized code
– With Java bytecode or intermediate code
 Build mode synchronized with Decision Center
22
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Comparison between engines compilation processes
Decision Engine
Decision Engine
(with intermediate code)
(with Java bytecode)
Business
Rules
Authoring
Deployment
Business
Rules
Compilation
Compilation
Decision algorithm
optimization
Decision algorithm
optimization
Intermediate code
generation
Bytecode
generation
Ruleset
Archive
Loading
Only supported
mode from
Decision Center
Default mode for the
decision engine in
Rule Designer
Ruleset
archive
Bytecode
generation
Java class loading
Java class loading
Executable rules
Executable rules
Execution
23
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Rule Execution Server and the decision engine
 Same API between CRE and DE for ruleset execution and management
 When deploying decision engine rulesets from Decision Center (with intermediate code),
there is a way to cache and reuse in the RES the ruleset that has been translated into Java
bytecode
– Benefit: much faster ruleset loading the second time the ruleset is loaded
– How: activate the cache option (in server admin console or in connector deployment
descriptor)
…
<config-property>
ra.xml
<config-property-name>compiledArchivesCacheProperties
</config-property-name>
<config-property-type>java.lang.String </config-property-type>
<config-property-value>maxSize=20,path=/var/cache/xu/ca_cache
<config-property-value>
</config-property>
…
24
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Enabled features in Rule Execution Server console
 Add ruleset built with DE
 Compatible functions on ruleset view page
– Test ruleset execution and view statistics
 dsar archive view (show rules and
ruleflows hierarchical structure only)
– Monitor options and HTDS options
– HTDS description files view and download
 Decision warehouse available
25
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Enabled features in Rule Designer
 Support creation of “New Client Project for
RuleApps” to be used with DE rule project
 Enable local and remote debugging for DE
archive
 Export DE ruleset archive with options
 Notification if the ruleset build mode of a rule
project referenced in a RuleApp is changed
 New sample to display execution trace
– 2 ruleApps deployed: one with CRE ruleset
and one with DE ruleset
– Execution traces are enabled
26
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Main current limitations
 In Rule Designer
– Can not use DVS to test the rulesets built with DE
– Can not run rule analysis on rule project built with DE
– Can not define custom rule language and translate custom rules into IRL in
DE mode
– Scorecard Modeler not supported in rule project built with DE
 In Decision Center
– Can not use DVS for test suites/simulation for ruleset built with DE
– Can not check ruleset archive at generation time (can check rule
consistency)
 In Rule Execution Server
– No rules – event bridge support
27
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Prochaines étapes
 Test de decision engine avec plus de projets clients
– Re – compilation avec decision engine
– Exécution, vérification, mesure des gains
 Collaboration avec le Lab ODM
 Mise en production
28
© 2013 IBM Corporation
Merci
Des questions ?
29
© 2013 IBM Corporation