Enabling tenant administrators to initiate request driven peak-hour builds to override off-peak patching schedules

• US 10,585,659 B2
• Filed: 03/29/2018
• Issued: 03/10/2020
• Est. Priority Date: 03/29/2018
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC (Microsoft Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC (Microsoft Corporation)
• Inventors: Krishnaswamy, Chandramouleeswaran, Nigam, Rahul, Guzman, Eladio, Gilbert, Mark Raymond, Cai, Jianfeng, Dhrolia, Mustafaraj M., Harwood, Peter Kenneth, Sharma, Esha, Lu, Jay, Isaak, Donovan
• Primary Examiner(s): Rivera, Anibal
• Application Number:
  US15/940,835
• Publication Number:
  US 20190303127A1
• Time in Patent Office: 712 Days
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/0709 in a distributed system consisting of a plurality of standalone computer nodes, e.g. clusters, client-server systems
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/0766 Error or fault reporting or storing
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/3409 for performance assessment
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/368 for test version control, e.g. updating test cases to a new software version
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2201/81 Threshold
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/60 Software deployment
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/65 Updates security arrangements therefor G06F21/57
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/658 Incremental updates; Differential updates
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/71 Version control security arrangements therefor G06F21/57; Configuration management
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/75 Structural analysis for program understanding
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 41/065 involving logical or physical relationship, e.g. grouping and hierarchies
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/0817 by checking functioning
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/0823 Errors, e.g. transmission errors
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/0876 Network utilisation, e.g. volume of load or congestion level
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 43/16 Threshold monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 67/12 specially adapted for proprietary or special-purpose networking environments, e.g. medical networks, sensor networks, networks in vehicles or remote metering networks
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 67/34 involving the movement of software or configuration parameters network booting or remote initial program loading [RIPL] G06F9/4416
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 67/535 Tracking the activity of the user network monitoring arrangements H04L43/00; recording of computer activity G06F11/34

Abstract

A system enables initiation of request driven peak-hour builds to override “off-peak” patching schedules for updating server applications. An “off-peak” patching schedule is generated to minimize disruption from installing builds of patches. Notwithstanding the “off-peak” patching schedule, a tenant administrator initiates request driven peak-hour builds when some performance failure occurs during peak business hours. For example, the tenant administrator may generate a service request that includes incident data that is usable to identify and/or develop a particular patch for resolving the performance failure. Based on the service request, the “off-peak” patching schedule is overridden to expedite an out-of-sequence installation of a particular patch. In this way, a tenant administrator that becomes aware that some performance failure is disrupting information workers during a peak usage time-range (e.g., business hours) is empowered to initiate a request driven peak-hour build to quickly resolve the performance failure during the peak usage time-range.

Claims

1. A system for enabling tenant administrators to initiate request driven peak-hour builds, the system comprising:

one or more processors;

a memory in communication with the one or more processors, the memory having computer-readable instructions stored thereupon which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to;

determine a patching schedule that defines one or more off-peak usage times for installing a sequence of builds on a plurality of server farms, wherein individual builds include one or more patches that are designed to modify a server application that is being executed by the plurality of server farms in association with a plurality of tenants;

receive, during a peak usage time-range, a service request that is indicative of a performance failure of the server application occurring in association with a particular tenant on a particular server farm, wherein the service request includes incident data that defines one or more characteristics of the performance failure;

identify, based on the incident data, an individual build of the sequence of builds that includes a particular patch that is designed to resolve the performance failure, wherein the individual build is non-sequential with another build that was last installed on the particular server farm; and

in response to the service request, transmit the individual build to the particular server farm as a request driven peak-hours build to override the patching schedule with an out-of-sequence installation of the individual build.

2. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions further cause the one or more processors to cause a service request portal to display at least one user interface (UI) element that enables a tenant administrator to define a severity indicator in association with the performance failure;

and wherein the request driven peak-hours build is transmitted based on the severity indicator exceeding a threshold severity level.

3. The system of claim 1, wherein the service request includes a peak-hour patching consent that corresponds to the particular tenant, and wherein the overriding the patching schedule is in response to the service request including the peak-hour patching consent.

4. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions further cause the one or more processors to:

determine an estimated relative impact associated with overriding the patching schedule to resolve the performance failure prior to a particular off-peak usage time for the particular server farm; and

cause a service request portal to communicate the estimated relative impact to a tenant administrator for the particular tenant.

5. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions further cause the one or more processors to:

generate an incident identifier (ID) based on the service request;

identify a plurality of other service requests that include other incident data that also defines the one or more characteristics;

associate the incident ID with a subset of the plurality of server farms that correspond to the plurality of other service requests; and

in response to the individual build becoming available for deployment, transmit to the subset a plurality of request driven peak-hour builds.

6. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions further cause the one or more processors to:

identify one or more intermediate builds that are ordered after the other build and prior to the individual build within the sequence of builds; and

prevent installation of the one or more intermediate builds on the particular server farm.

7. The system of claim 6, wherein preventing installation of the one or more intermediate builds on the particular server farm includes preventing transmission of the one or more intermediate builds to the particular server farm.

8. The system of claim 1, wherein successive builds within the sequence of builds include incremental additions to the one or more patches.

9. A computer-implemented method, comprising:

receiving build data defining a sequence of builds for installation on a server farm, wherein individual builds of the sequence of builds include one or more patches for modifying a server application;

determining a patching schedule for installing a second build on the server farm subsequent to a first build being installed on the server farm, the patching schedule to trigger build installations outside of a peak usage time-range for a tenant of the server farm;

receiving, during the peak usage time-range, a service request that is indicative of a performance failure of the server application occurring in association with the tenant, wherein the service request indicates a peak patching consent of a tenant administrator of the tenant, and wherein the service request indicates one or more characteristics of the performance failure;

based on the one or more characteristics of the performance failure, identifying a third build that includes a particular patch that is designed to resolve the performance failure; and

in response to the peak patching consent, transmitting a request driven peak-hours build to the server farm during the peak usage time-range, wherein the request driven peak-hours build to overrides the patching schedule by triggering an out-of-sequence installation of the third build.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the service request includes a severity indicator that is defined by the tenant administrator corresponding to the tenant.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the out-of-sequence installation of the third build is initiated during the peak usage time-range based on a determination that the severity indicator is above a threshold severity level.

12. The computer-implemented method of claim 10,

wherein the patching schedule defines a threshold activity level to prevent build installations from being triggered when an activity level between one or more tenants and the server farm is above the threshold activity level, and

wherein, based on the severity indicator, the out-of-sequence installation of the third build is initiated during the peak usage time-range when the activity level between one or more tenants and the server farm is above the threshold activity level.

13. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, further comprising preventing transmission of the second build to the server farm based on the out-of-sequence installation of the third build on the server farm.

14. The computer-implemented method of claim 13, wherein the second build in an intermediate build in the sequence of builds with respect to the first build and the third build, and wherein the third build is inclusive of a set patches of the second build.

15. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein identifying the third build that includes the particular patch monitoring the build data to determine when the particular patch becomes available for deployment to the server farm.

16. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the performance failure corresponds to a software regression associated with one or more functionalities of the server application.

17. A system, comprising:

one or more processors;

a memory in communication with the one or more processors, the memory having computer-readable instructions stored thereupon which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to;

receive, during a peak usage time-range, a service request that is indicative of a performance failure of a server application occurring in association with a tenant that is being facilitated by a server farm;

identify an individual build of a sequence of builds that includes a particular patch that is designed to resolve the performance failure;

determine whether to override an off-peak patching schedule by causing an installation of the individual build on the server farm during peak usage time-range based on at least one of;

a peak patching consent that is provided by a tenant administrator in the service request, or

an estimated relative impact of resolving the performance failure during the peak usage time-range relative to resolving the performance failure after the peak usage time-range; and

based on a determination to override the off-peak patching schedule, transmit the individual build to the server farm as a request driven peak-hours build to override the patching schedule with an out-of-sequence installation of the individual build that occurs during the peak usage time-range.

18. The system of claim 17, wherein the computer-readable instructions further cause the one or more processors to prevent transmission of one or more intermediate builds to the server farm to reduce network traffic in association with the server farm.

19. The system of claim 17, wherein the estimated relative impact is determined based on a comparison between:

a first estimated impact associated with the performance failure continuing throughout the peak usage time-range; and

a second estimated impact associated with installing the individual build during the peak usage time-range.

20. The system of claim 17, wherein the performance failure corresponds to a software regression.