Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Remarks
Examiner initially notes that Applicant’s representative and Examiner spoke in late September 2024 to discuss ways to advance prosecution. While no specific claim language was discussed, Examiner suggested features from paragraphs [0113]-[0116] of the specification as filed, which include a query delay manager that may execute requests at once or hold execution of requests and priority class buckets from which queries are selected for execution based on a priority associated with each bucket.
Examiner notes that, in the claims submitted on 12 April 2026, the claims are amended to include some of these features, but fail to include any mention of the priority class buckets from which queries are selected for execution based on a priority associated with each bucket. Examiner also notes that a significant feature of the claims, notably, changing the one or more actual clock rates of the one or more physical processors, based on the determined target computing capacity, by skipping one or more clock cycles of the physical processors has been removed from the claims.
It is noted that Examiner still believes that such features, including the query delay manager and the use of priority buckets by said query delay manager, if properly claimed in the independent claims and including the subject matter deleted in the claim amendments of 12 April 2026, would advance prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 19, and 20 refer to “the computing resources.” There is no antecedent basis for this element. While “resources” were previously introduced in the claims, “computing resources” were not.
The portion of claims 1, 19, and 20 amended in the reply of 12 April 2026 recites “by at least limiting access to at least one of the computing resources of at least one of the computing resources of at least one database nodes that is required for the execution of the of the obtained database query.”
Multiple phrases are written twice, including “at least one of the computing resources” and “of the.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sivasubramanian et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2010/0250748) in view of Barsness et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2012/0215764), and further in view of Bestgen et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2009/0319474).
As to claim 1, Sivasubramanian teaches a computer-implemented method for controlling capacity of a database system that includes one or more database nodes operable to process database queries of data stored in a database, wherein each one of the database nodes can use one or more resources in connection with the processing of the data stored in the database, the computer-implemented method comprising:
Obtaining, by the database system, a database query of the data stored in the database (see paragraph [0036]. The user may issue queries against a database),
Wherein the database query is associated with a first user of the database (see paragraphs [0024] and [0036]. A user may submit a query. Because the user submits the query, the query is “associated” with the user);
Obtaining … , by the database system, at least one database service criterion of the first user indicative of an allocated database system processing capacity allocated for processing the database queries associated with the first user of the database (see paragraph [0038]. Each customer, or user, may specify thresholds for capacities. The system is able to monitor usage of the system by the customer to determine whether a threshold of usage will be met or exceeded. Based on a rate of increase of usage, the system can determine actions to take, such as scaling of capacity for a given customer. This information is obtained “for a query” because queries are tasks that make use of the system resources);
Monitoring, by the database system, access capacity of the database system being utilized to process database queries associated with the first user of the database (see paragraph [0035]. Sivasubramanian monitors current usage of system resources for processing tasks and compares the current usage to a threshold. It is noted that usages are related to customers who have defined thresholds ([0038]) and queries are tasks that make up resources that are used in the system and that users may submit queries ([0024]-[0025])),
Wherein the access capacity is determined, by the database system, at least partly based on one or more workload priorities of one or more database queries of the database, including the obtained database query (see paragraphs [0038]-[0040]. A customer may set preferences for how the system should react to access capacities approaching a threshold. These preferences are “workload priorities” that are “associated with a user.” Thus, access capacity is at least partly based on workload priorities of the database queries),
wherein the one or more database queries are made by the first user (see paragraph [0025]. The user may access the database management system to submit queries. The DBMS receives and executes queries. The query governor may determine runtime for the query and may enable the usage of additional resources in processing the query),
…
Determining, based on the monitoring of the access capacity and the database service criteria of the first user of the database and the obtained at least one database service criterion of the first user, a target computing capacity for processing the database query associated with the first user of the database (see paragraph [0038]. The current usage is compared to a service threshold associated with a user, or a “service criterion.” When needed, the system scales the resources of the user to a target capacity);
Changing, by the database system, processing capacity of the database system … from a current computing capacity to the determined target computing capacity obtained … wherein the determined target computing capacity is different than the current capacity …, by at least causing usage capacity of at least one of the resources … to be changed from a current usage capacity to another usage capacity different than the current usage capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0013] and [0015] for general discussion of manually or automatically changing the data environment. Also see [0016] and Figure 6 for showing that and a customer may authorize automatically increasing processing capacity or storage capacity by the database system. Also see paragraph [0038], which discusses scaling resources), by performing at least the following:
…
Thereby effectively changing, by the database system, access capacity of at least one of the computing resources of the at least one of the database nodes of the database system from a current access capacity to a different access capacity (see paragraphs [0013], [0015]-[0016] and [0048]. Storage capacity may be adjusted automatically by the database system)
…
Sivasubramanian does not explicitly show:
Obtaining, for the database query, by the database system, at least one database service criterion of the first user indicative of an allocated database system processing capacity allocated for processing the database queries associated with the first user of the database,
wherein the workload priorities are priorities assigned to management of database queries processed as a database workload by the database system, wherein the database workload represents an amount of processing performed by the database system in a determined period of time, and wherein the workload priorities are assigned to satisfy one or more goals associated with the database workload;
Changing, by the database system, processing capacity of the database system for processing the obtained database query from a current computing capacity to the determined target computing capacity obtained for processing the obtained database query, where the determined target computing capacity is different than the current capacity for processing the obtained database query, by at least causing usage capacity of at least one of the resources configured to process the obtained database query to be changed from a current usage capacity to another usage capacity different than the current usage capacity;
Using a query execution manager of the database system to delay completion of the execution of the obtained query associated with the first user,
Based on at least one workload priority assigned to the obtained database query that is managed by the query execution manager in a queue, by at least limiting access to at least one of the computing resources of at least one of the computing resources of at least one database nodes that is required for the execution of the of the obtained database query,
Wherein the access capacity includes the processing capacity to process one or more database queries of the database; and
Processing of the obtained database query associated with the first user of the database data, by the at least one of the database nodes pursuant to the determined target computing capacity.
Barsness teaches:
Obtaining, by the database system, a database query of the data stored in the database (see paragraphs [0048]-[0049]. The system receives a query. The query governor evaluates the query to determine whether to use additional performance capabilities of the system to manage query execution),
Wherein the database query is associated with a first user of the database (see paragraphs [0025] and [0027]. Queries are associated with users);
Obtaining, for the database query, by the database system, at least one database service criterion of the first user indicative of an allocated database system processing capacity allocated for processing the database queries associated with the first user of the database (see paragraph [0050]. A requesting entity, such as a user, may submit a threshold amount of time for a query to be completed in. This is a “database service criterion of the first user” that is indicative of a processing capacity currently allocated for queries);
Monitoring, by the database system, access capacity of the database system being utilized to process database queries associated with the first user of the database, Wherein the access capacity is determined, by the database system, at least partly based on one or more workload priorities of one or more database queries of the database, including the obtained database query, wherein the one or more database queries are made by the first user (as noted in paragraph [0041], queries may have priority classes which are used to calculate a maximum allowable runtime, which is used when calculating access capacity),
wherein the workload priorities are priorities assigned to management of database queries processed as a database workload by the database system, wherein the database workload represents an amount of processing performed by the database system in a determined period of time, and wherein the workload priorities are assigned to satisfy one or more goals associated with the database workload (see Barsness paragraph [0041]. Barsness discusses assigning priorities to queries and allocating processing power to queries such that high-priority queries are processed more quickly than low priority queries. Barsness also discusses setting maximum amounts of time to process queries, showing that the priorities “represent an amount of processing performed by the database system in a determined period of time.” Barsness also discusses goals associated with the database system, including whether an application is mission critical or not, showing that the priorities are assigned to satisfy one or more goals associated with the database workload);
…
Changing, by the database system, processing capacity of the database system for processing the obtained database query from a current computing capacity to the determined target computing capacity obtained for processing the obtained database query, where the determined target computing capacity is different than the current capacity for processing the obtained database query, by at least causing usage capacity of at least one of the resources configured to process the obtained database query to be changed from a current usage capacity to another usage capacity different than the current usage capacity (see paragraph [0048]. The query governor determines whether to use additional performance capabilities of the system resources to ensure that a query is completed within a threshold amount of time. This will ensure that queries are processed with an acceptable amount of time. It is noted that Sivasubramanian describes that resources that may be extended as needed by a database system, as cited above);
…
Wherein the access capacity includes the processing capacity to process one or more database queries of the database (see paragraph [0048]); and
Processing of the obtained database query associated with the first user of the database data, by the at least one of the database nodes pursuant to the determined target computing capacity (see paragraph [0048]. Additional performance capacities of the system resources, such as a higher cycle rate for a processor, may be used to execute a query).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sivasubramanian by the teachings of Barsness because both references are directed towards monitoring usage of system resources in performing tasks and adjusting performance of those system resources in response to the usage. Barsness simply provides a user of Sivasubramanian the ability to adjust additional system resources in response to a threshold need to execute a task, which will ensure that users will have tasks, such as queries, done within an acceptable amount of time in Sivasubramanian.
Bestgen teaches:
Using a query execution manager of the database system to delay completion of the execution of the obtained query associated with the first user (see Bestgen paragraph [0036]. Queries may be placed into a queue and held for a time until execution. This is delaying a completion of an obtained query. It is noted that this delay may be done on a user basis according to user preference),
Based on at least one workload priority assigned to the obtained database query that is managed by the query execution manager in a queue, by at least limiting access to at least one of the computing resources of at least one of the computing resources of at least one database nodes that is required for the execution of the of the obtained database query (see Bestgen paragraph [0036]. The queries are placed into a queue and held. The queries may be given a priority level associated with a user or with each individual query. This is a workload priority. The queries may be released from the queue and executed after a set amount of time. This limits access to computing resources required for execution of the query, see paragraph [0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sivasubramanian by the teachings of Bestgen because both references are directed towards monitoring usage of system resources in performing tasks. By delaying queries Bestgen also improves the system of Sivasubramanian by increasing efficiency of the energy usage when executing queries (see Bestgen paragraph [0036]).
As to claim 2, Sivasubramanian as modified teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the causing of the usage capacity of the least one resource to be changed comprises:
causing the capacity of the at least one resource to be changed when the database system is operational (see Sivasubramanian [0049]. Resources may be scaled without affecting the availability of the resources).
As to claim 3, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the causing of the usage capacity of the least one resource to be changed comprises:
causing the capacity of at least one resource to be changed dynamically at runtime (see Sivasubramanian [0047]-[0049]. Resources may be changed as the system is operating).
As to claim 4, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 3,
wherein the database system includes multiple database nodes operable to process data stored in the database and access at least one of the resources in parallel (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0020] and [0024]. Multiple databases may exist. As noted in paragraph [0030], tasks may be performed on databases in parallel), and
wherein the causing of the usage capacity of the least one resource to be changed comprises:
causing capacity of first and second resources that can be accessed respectively by first and second nodes of the multiple nodes to be changed (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0047]-[0051]. Storage capacity may be changed).
As to claim 5, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein the causing of capacity of first and second resources to be changed is performed when the database is processing data, dynamically, at runtime (see Sivasubramanian paragraph [0051]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]).
As to claim 6, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises:
obtaining a target computing capacity for the database system, wherein the target computing capacity is the less than the full computing capacity of the database system (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0048]-[0051]. A user may submit a target that is less than the full capacity, also shown in Figure 6); and
wherein the causing of usage capacity of the least one resource to be changed cause the capacity of the at least one resource to be changed based on the target capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0048]-[0051]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048] to change the clock rate of a processor in response to usage parameters).
As to claim 7, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the resources that can be accessed by one or more database nodes includes one or more of the following:
one or more processors, one or more other computing resources, access to Input/Output (I/O) associated with the database, access to one or more operations, access to one or more database operations (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0046]-[0051] for examples of at least processors and computing resources).
As to claim 8, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises:
limiting usage of at least one of database nodes of the database system beyond a level at which usage can be provided when usage of the at least database is regulated at full capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0038]-[0039] and [0046] and Figure 6. Usage is limited to be less than capacity).
As to claim 10, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the limiting of the usage of least one the database nodes of the database system comprises:
effectively delaying access to at least Input/Output (I/O) resource of the at least one of the computing resources, thereby delaying usage of the at least one computing resource (see Sivasubramanian paragraph [0052]. Access may be delayed during a maintenance period).
As to claim 11, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the effectively delaying access to at least one of the computing resources comprises:
scheduling access to the at least one computing resource according to a determined delay period (see Sivasubramanian paragraph [0052]. Access may be scheduled around a maintenance window period).
As to claim 12, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the changing of the capacity of the database system comprises:
controlling the computing capacity of the database system based on a target computing capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046] and Figure 6. Target computing capacities may be set by a user) by one or more of the following:
regulating the computing capacity of at least one of multiple database nodes of the database system (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]) by limiting at least one:
(i) processing or execution capacity of one or more processors of one or more of the database nodes (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]. Processing capacity on a database node may be regulated. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048] for changing clock rates, which affects processing or execution capacity of one or more processors), and
(ii) I/O usage of one or more processors of one or more of the database nodes.
As to claim 13, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises:
obtaining monitored computing usage data by monitoring computing usage of one or more database nodes of the database system (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]); and
Docket No. 20788C0167controlling the computing capacity of the database system based on the monitored computing usage data (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048].
As to claim 14, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the limiting of the usage comprises:
monitoring computing usage of at least a first activity that is not regulated with respect to its usage of at least one of the resources (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0038] and [0043]-[0044]. Read activity may be monitored, with respect to memory and processing capacity);
determining, at least partially based on the monitored computing usage data, whether to regulate or change regulation of the computing usage of a second activity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0043]-[0044]. Processing and memory can be addressed); and
initiating regulation or changing the regulation of the computing usage of the second activity with respect to one or more of the resources when the determining determines to limit the computing usage of the second activity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0043]-[0044]. Processing and memory can be addressed).
As to claim 15, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, where the computer-implemented method further comprises:
obtaining a target computing capacity for the database system (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0046]-[0051]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]); and
regulating the computing usage of one or more database activities associated with the database system based on the target computing capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0046]-[0051]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]).
As to claim 16, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises:
monitoring the one or more database activities at least with respect to their usage of the one or more resources (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]); and
regulating the computing usage of one or more database activities based on the monitoring of the one or more database activities when the database is active (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0045]-[0046]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]).
As to claim 17, Sivasubramanian teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises:
determining, based on one or more criteria, whether to change capacity of the database system from the current computing capacity to the other computing capacity (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0048]-[0051]. Also see Barsness paragraphs [0046]-[0048]).
As to claim 18, Sivasubramanian as modified teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the one or more criteria comprises one or more of the following:
managing a service of the database (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0048]-[0051]);
managing a service level associated with a service of the database (see Barsness paragraph [0039]); and
meeting a service level goal and/or service level agreement (see Barsness paragraph [0039]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sivasubramanian et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2010/0250748) in view of Gibson et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2011/0239220), and further in view of Bestgen et al. (US Pre-Grant Publication 2009/0319474).
As to claim 19, Sivasubramanian teaches a system that includes one or more processors operable to:
Control capacity of a database system that includes one or more database nodes operable to process data stored in a database, wherein each one of the one or more database nodes can use one or more resources in connection with the processing of the data stored in the database (see Sivasubramanian paragraphs [0013] and [0015] for general discussion of manually or automatically changing the data environment. Also see [0016] and Figure 6 for showing that and a customer may authorize automatically increasing processing capacity or storage capacity by the database system); and
change capacity of the database system from a current computing capacity to another computing capacity that is [different] than the current capacity, by causing usage capacity of at least one of the resources to be changed from a current usage capacity to another usage capacity different than the current usage capacity (see paragraphs [0013], [0015]-[0016] and [0048]),
…
effectively changing access capacity of at least one of the computing resources of the at least one of the database nodes of the database system from a current access capacity to a different access capacity (see paragraphs [0013], [0015]-[0016] and [0048]. Storage capacity may be adjusted automatically by the database system).
Sivasubramanian does not explicitly show:
change capacity of the database system from a current computing capacity to another computing capacity that is effectively lower than the current usage capacity by at least performing the following:
using a query execution manager of the database system, to delay completion of the execution of the obtained database query associated with the first user, based on at least one workload priority assigned to the obtained database query that is managed by the query execution manager in a queue, by at least limiting access to at least one of the computing resources of at least one of the computing resources of at least one database nodes that is required for the execution of the of the obtained database query; and
Gibson teaches:
change capacity of the database system from a current computing capacity to another computing capacity that is effectively lower than the current usage capacity (see paragraph [0015]. Gibson shows to monitor tasks for performance. Each task has an associated performance parameter. By comparing the monitored performance with the performance parameter, Gibson shows to modify a processor clock rate for the monitored task. Also see paragraphs [0047] for monitoring resource usage and [0060] for monitoring and adjusting clock rates of processors. Also see paragraph [0060], which states that “the requested clock rate can be adjusted down without adversely reducing the rate of work completed.” Thus, Gibson explicitly shows changing the clock rate by adjusting the clock rate downward).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sivasubramanian by the teachings of Gibson because both references are directed towards monitoring usage of system resources in performing tasks and adjusting performance of those system resources in response to the usage. Gibson simply provides a user of Sivasubramanian the ability to adjust additional system resources, which will increase the responsiveness of Sivasubramanian to a customer’s need.
Bestgen teaches:
Changing capacity of the database system … by at least performing the following:
using a query execution manager of the database system, to delay completion of the execution of the obtained database query associated with the first user, based on at least one workload priority assigned to the obtained database query that is managed by the query execution manager in a queue, by at least limiting access to at least one of the computing resources of at least one of the computing resources of at least one database nodes that is required for the execution of the of the obtained database query (see Bestgen paragraph [0036] and the explanation of the rejection of claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sivasubramanian by the teachings of Bestgen because both references are directed towards monitoring usage of system resources in performing tasks. By delaying queries Bestgen also improves the system of Sivasubramanian by increasing efficiency of the energy usage when executing queries (see Bestgen paragraph [0036]).
As to claim 20, see the rejection of claim 19.
For the non-transient computer readable storage medium, see Sivasubramanian paragraph [0067].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES D ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-3938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 5712701760. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLES D ADAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165
Prosecution Insights