SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING APPLICATION SUITABILITY IN EXECUTION ENVIRONMENT

• US 20110270963A1
• Filed: 08/13/2009
• Published: 11/03/2011
• Est. Priority Date: 08/13/2009
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Hitachi, Ltd.
• Original Assignee: Hitachi, Ltd.
• Inventors: Yamaguchi, Akihiko, Saito, Kota, Beniyama, Nobuo, Hatakeyama, Atsushi
• Granted Patent: US 8,566,391 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/224
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/302 where the computing system component is a software system
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/3051 Monitoring arrangements for monitoring the configuration of the computing system or of the computing system component, e.g. monitoring the presence of processing resources, peripherals, I/O links, software programs verification or detection of system hardware configuration G06F11/2247
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 21/105 Arrangements for software license management or administration, e.g. for managing licenses at corporate level
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 21/57 Certifying or maintaining trusted computer platforms, e.g. secure boots or power-downs, version controls, system software checks, secure updates or assessing vulnerabilities
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2221/2101 Auditing as a secondary aspect
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2221/2135 Metering
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2221/2149 Restricted operating environment
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/5072 Grid computing
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 63/1433 Vulnerability analysis

Abstract

An evaluation system evaluates the suitability of an application in a plurality of types of application execution environments based on the characteristics of this application and the usage of this application by a user. The evaluation system displays information denoting the result of this evaluation.

Claims

1. An evaluation system comprising:

a communication interface device, which is coupled to a network that is coupled to a client; and

a controller, which is coupled to the communication interface device,

wherein the controller;

(A) evaluates the suitability of an application in a plurality of types of application execution environments, based on characteristics of the application used by a user of the client and/or a usage of the application by the user, and

(B) displays information denoting the result of the evaluation in the (A).

2. An evaluation system according to claim 1,

wherein the controller evaluates the suitability of a type of the application from among a plurality of application types as an evaluation of the suitability of the application in a plurality of types of application execution environments,

wherein the application type comprises a physical type which signifies an application that is installed and executed in a client, a virtual type S which signifies a virtual application that conforms to an application virtualization technology in which an application delivered from an application server is executed in a client environment that isolates access by the application to a native resource provided by an OS, and a virtual type H which signifies a virtual application that conforms to an application virtualization technology in which an application is executed by a client remotely on an application server,

wherein the application is executed on the client in a case where the application type is the physical type,

wherein the client receives the application from an application server and the application is executed on the client in a case where the application type is the virtual type S,

wherein the application is executed on the application server in a case where the application type is the virtual type H,

wherein the client manages utilization log information which is information denoting a utilization log of the application, and application information which is information related to the application,

wherein the application characteristics comprise a version, a number of patches, and a support OS,

wherein the application usage comprises a current type of the application, a number of users of the application, and an offline utilization rate which denotes how much the application has been utilized offline,

wherein the controller manages an evaluation policy,

wherein the evaluation policy includes either a formula or a value for a plurality of evaluation standpoints for each application type,

wherein the evaluation standpoint comprises a user convenience, a security, and a cost,

wherein the formula or value corresponding to the user convenience is either a formula or a value which is based on at least one of the application offline utilization rate and whether or not the client comprises an OS that corresponds to the support OS,

wherein the formula or value corresponding to the security is either a formula or a value which is based on at least one of a number of patches of the application and a number of users of the application,

wherein the cost is a value based on a number of users of the application,

wherein, in the (A), the controller:

(a1) acquires, from the client, information comprising the application information and the utilization log information;

(a2) learns the application characteristics and the application usage from the acquired information;

(a3) calculates, based on the evaluation policy and the application characteristics and usage, an evaluation value denoting the suitability of each application type of the application for each evaluation standpoint; and

(a4) calculates the difference between an evaluation value for each evaluation standpoint for a current application type and an evaluation value for each evaluation standpoint for one or more different application types, and

wherein, in the (B), the controller displays, based on the difference calculated in the (a4), an effect of changing the application type of the application from the current application type to the one or more different application types.

3. An evaluation system according to claim 2,

wherein, in the (A), the controller calculates a priority ranking for a type change candidate based on a priority of the user convenience, the security and the cost, and the evaluation value calculated in the (a3), and in the (B), the controller lines up and displays a plurality of type change candidates in descending order of the priority ranking of the type change candidates, and

wherein the type change candidate is defined by an application, the current application type of this application, and the post-change application type of this application.

4. An evaluation system according to claim 3,

wherein, in the evaluation policy:

(U1) the formula or value of the user convenience corresponding to the physical type is either a formula or a value which is based on a number of clients that have an OS corresponding to a support OS;

(U2) the formula or value of the user convenience corresponding to the virtual type S is either a formula or a value which is independent of the number of clients that have an OS corresponding to the support OS;

(U3) the formula or value of the user convenience corresponding to the virtual type H is either a formula or a value which is independent of the offline utilization rate of the application;

(S1) the formula or value of the security corresponding to the physical type is either a formula or a value which is based on both the number of patches and the number of users of the application;

(S2) the formula or value of the security corresponding to the virtual type S is either a formula or a value which is based on the number of users of the application and is independent of the number of patches of the application;

(S3) the formula or value of the security corresponding to the virtual type H is either a formula or a value which is based on the number of users of the application and is independent of the number of patches of the application;

(C1) the formula or value of the cost corresponding to the physical type is either a formula or a value which is based on the number of users of the application;

(C2) the formula or value of the cost corresponding to the virtual type S is either a formula or a value which is independent of the number of users of the application; and

(C3) the formula or value of the cost corresponding to the virtual type H is either a formula or a value which is independent of the number of users of the application,

and wherein, regarding the evaluation value calculated in the (a3);

(u1) in a case where there are numerous clients that have an OS corresponding to the support OS, the evaluation values for the physical type and the user convenience are high, and in a case where there are few clients that have an OS corresponding to the support OS, the evaluation values for the physical type and the user convenience are low;

(s1) in a case where the number of patches of the application is numerous, the evaluation value for the security is low, and in a case where the number of patches of the application is few, the evaluation value for the security is high;

(s2) in a case where the number of users of the application is numerous, the evaluation values for the security and the physical type are low, and in a case where the number of users of the application is few, the evaluation values for the security and the physical type are high; and

(c1) in a case where the number of users of the application is numerous, the evaluation values for the cost and the physical type are low, and in a case where the number of users of the application is few, the evaluation values for the cost and the physical type are high.

5. An evaluation system according to claim 1,

wherein the controller manages an evaluation policy,

wherein the evaluation policy is information including either a formula or a value that conforms to one or more evaluation standpoints prepared for each application execution environment, and

wherein, in the (A), the controller calculates, for each evaluation standpoint, an evaluation value denoting the suitability of the application in each type of application execution environment based on the evaluation policy, and on the characteristics of the application and/or the usage of the application.

6. An evaluation system according to claim 5,

wherein the one or more evaluation standpoints comprise a user convenience, and

wherein an evaluation value is calculated for the user convenience based on at least one of the following (6-1) through (6-8):

(6-1) a number of clients having an OS that corresponds to an application support OS;

(6-2) a number of types of versions of an application;

(6-3) a presence or absence of the use of a shared library;

(6-4) an application implementation time;

(6-5) an offline utilization rate denoting how much an application has been utilized offline;

(6-6) a utilization rate, which is a percentage of the application utilization time on all clients with respect to a specified operating period;

(6-6) whether or not application processing performance in an execution environment satisfies processing performance required by the application; and

(6-8) simultaneous executability of the application.

7. An evaluation system according to claim 5,

wherein the one or more evaluation standpoints comprise a security, and

wherein an evaluation value is calculated for the security based on at least one of the following (7-1) through (7-4):

(7-1) a number of patches of the application;

(7-2) a number of users of the application;

(7-3) a patch application frequency of the application; and

(7-4) a data storage environment.

8. An evaluation system according to claim 5,

wherein the one or more evaluation standpoints comprises a cost, and

wherein an evaluation value is calculated for the cost based on at least one of the following (8-1) through (8-6):

(8-1) a number of users of the application;

(8-2) a number of implementation processes of the application;

(8-3) a billing method;

(8-4) traffic of a network through which a cloud service, which is a function used by an application, is provided by a cloud system;

(8-5) an amount of data stored in the cloud system; and

(8-6) a utilization time of the cloud service.

9. An evaluation system according to claim 5,

wherein the plurality of types of application execution environments comprise at least two of:

a physical environment, which is an environment in which an application is installed in the client and executed on the client;

one or more virtual environments, which are environments in which an application that conforms to an application virtualization technology is executed; and

one or more cloud environments, which are environments in which an application is executed on a cloud system that provides a client with a function of the application.

10. An evaluation system according to claim 5,

wherein the controller calculates a priority ranking of a type change candidate based on the calculated evaluation value, and in the (B), the controller lines up and displays a plurality of type change candidates in descending order of the priority ranking of the type change candidates, and

wherein the type change candidate is defined by an application, the current application execution environment of this application, and the post-change application execution environment of this application.

11. An evaluation system according to claim 1,

wherein, in the (A), the controller:

(a1) evaluates the suitability of an application in a plurality of types of application execution environments, based on characteristics of the application used by a user of the client and/or a usage of the application by the user; and

(a2) calculates, the difference between the suitability of the application in a current application execution environment and the suitability of the application in one or more different application execution environments, and

wherein, in the (B), the controller displays, based on the difference calculated in the (a2), the effect of changing the application execution environment of the application from the current application execution environment to the one or more different application execution environments.

12. An evaluation system according to claim 11,

wherein, in the (A), the controller calculates a priority ranking of an environment change candidate, and in the (B), the controller lines up and displays a plurality of environment change candidates in descending order of the priority ranking of the environment change candidates, and

wherein an environment change candidate is defined by an application, the current application execution environment of this application, and a post-change application execution environment of this application.

13. An evaluation system according to claim 11,

wherein subsequent to displaying the information in the (B), the controller receives a specification for an administrator-desired environment change candidate, and changes the application execution environment from the current execution environment to a different execution environment in accordance with the specified environment change candidate.

14. An evaluation system according to claim 1,

wherein the controller evaluates the suitability of an application of a plurality of applications, exclusive of an application that meets a condition signifying that there is no need to evaluate the suitability of the application in the execution environment.

15. An evaluation system according to claim 3,

wherein the controller executes the (a3) and the (a4) for an application of a plurality of applications, exclusive of an application that meets a condition signifying that there is no need to evaluate the suitability of the type of the application.