SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SERVICE AVAILABILITY MANAGEMENT

• US 20110161744A1
• Filed: 03/08/2011
• Published: 06/30/2011
• Est. Priority Date: 01/11/2006
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Paul G. Nordstrom
• Original Assignee: Paul G. Nordstrom
• Inventors: Nordstrom, Paul G.
• Granted Patent: US 8,296,609 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 714/47.3
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2209/5022 Workload threshold
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/505 considering the load

Abstract

A service framework uses importance ranking information in making call decisions and/or wait-time decisions in connection with service requests. Each of the service requests has an importance ranking which reflects the importance of the information provided by the service to a task being performed. The health of a service may be controlled by permitting fewer (or more) service requests to be made to the service when the service is less (or more) healthy. The likelihood of a service request being made to the service may depend on the importance, ranking of the service request. When waiting for a response, a determination whether to continue waiting may be made based on the likelihood that the service has failed and based on the importance of the information to the task being performed.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method, executed in a computing system executing code, for processing data in a service framework, comprising:

receiving an assessment of a relative state of health of a service;

receiving an assessment of a relative importance of the service to a task being performed; and

determining whether to continue to wait for a response from the service to a request sent to the service, wherein determining whether to continue to wait for a response from the service is based on the assessments of relative state of health and relative importance of the service, wherein a request for service with a lower relative importance is waited upon as long as a request for a service with a higher relative importance is being waited upon.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining whether to continue to wait is based on a classification of the request and a relative state of health of the service.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein a first classification corresponds to requests made to the service from the task when the relative state of health of the service is assessed as low and the relative importance of the service is assessed as low.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein a second classification corresponds to requests to be made to the service when the relative state of health of the service is assessed as low and the relative importance of the service is assessed as high, wherein the first classification is less than or equal to the second classification.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein a third classification corresponds to requests to be made to the service when the relative state of health of the service is assessed as high, wherein the second classification is less than or equal to the third classification.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on response times taken by the service to respond to prior service requests.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on a number of service requests unanswered by the service during a preceding time period.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the relative importance of the service is manually specified.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining whether to continue to wait comprises calculating a resource allocation and a failure expectation time.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the resource allocation time is calculated based on information regarding the relative importance of the service and based on an amount of time remaining before expiration of a deadline for completing the task.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the failure expectation time is calculated based on the relative health of the service and is configured to provide a metric for determining when the service has likely failed.

12. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining whether to continue to wait is further performed based on a deadline for completing the task.

13. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the task is constructing a web page for publication to a visitor of a website.

14. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the assessment of the relative state of health of the service is performance information concerning the response time of the service.

15. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the relative importance is specified as a continuous value.

16. A system including a memory and a processor providing services comprising:

an interface component to transmit service requests to a plurality of service and to obtain responses thereto; and

a processing component configured to obtain an assessment of a relative state of health of a requested service and an assessment of a relative importance of the requested service to a task being performed, wherein the processing component determines whether to continue to wait for a response from the service based on the assessments of relative state of health and relative importance of the service, wherein a request for service with a lower relative importance is waited upon as long as a request for a service with a higher relative importance is being waited upon.

17. A system as recited in claim 16, wherein the importance ranking is specified as a continuous value and the number of the plurality of modes of operation is potentially infinite.

18. A system as recited in claim 16, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on response times taken by the service to respond to prior service requests.

19. The system as recited in claim 16, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on a number of service requests unanswered by the service during a preceding time period.

20. The system as recited in claim 16, wherein the relative importance of the service is manually specified.

21. The system as recited in claim 16, wherein the processing component determines whether to continue to wait comprises calculating a resource allocation and a failure expectation time.

22. A computer-implemented method, executed in a computing system executing code, for processing data in a service framework, comprising:

receiving an assessment of a relative state of health of a service;

receiving an assessment of a relative importance of the service to a task being performed; and

managing the pendency of outstanding service request responses based according to the assessments of relative state of health and relative importance of the service, wherein a request for service with a lower relative importance is maintained upon as long as a request for a service with a higher relative importance is being waited upon.

23. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on response times taken by the service to respond to prior service requests.

24. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the relative state of health of a service is determined based on a number of service requests unanswered by the service during a preceding time period.

25. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the relative importance of the service is manually specified.

26. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein determining whether to continue to wait comprises calculating a resource allocation and a failure expectation time.

27. The computer-implemented method of claim 26, wherein the resource allocation time is calculated based on information regarding the relative importance of the service and based on an amount of time remaining before expiration of a deadline for completing the task.

28. The computer-implemented method of claim 27, wherein the failure expectation time is calculated based on the relative health of the service and is configured to provide a metric for determining when the service has likely failed.

29. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein determining whether to continue to wait is further performed based on a deadline for completing the task.

30. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the task is constructing a web page for publication to a visitor of a website.

31. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the assessment of the relative state of health of the service is performance information concerning the response time of the service.

32. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the relative importance is specified as a continuous value.