DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 7-8, 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-- the the -- should be -- the -- in claim 7 line 3, claim 8 line 3, and claim 20 lines 4, 9.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
-- the the -- should be -- the -- in [0043], [0084], [0085]. Multiple such deficiency exists.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following claim language is not clearly understood:
Claim 1 line 4 recites “optimal state” without clearly reciting what constitutes the optimal state.
Claim 1 line 3 recites “pod-warm component” without clearly reciting what constitutes the pod-warm component or what is pod-warm component.
Claim 4 recites “prominent pod instantiation curves” without clearly reciting what is being referred by prominent i.e. what makes the pod instantiation curve a prominent.
Claim 1 line 10 recites “instantiate the second instance of the pod fully warm in the optimal state”. It is unclear what is being referred by fully warm, and if the fully warm optimal state is same or different from the optimal state.
Claim 3 recites “pod instantiation curve corresponding to the …on a pod optimization graph. It is unclear what are pod instantiation curve and pod optimization graph e.g. what parameters are illustrated on the x/y -axis of these graph .
Claims 9 and 14 recite elements of claim 1 and have similar deficiency as claim 1. Therefore, they are rejected for the same rational. Remaining dependent claims 2-8, 10-13 and 15-20 are also rejected due to similar deficiency inherited from the rejected independent claims.
* Applicant is advised to at least indicate support present in the specification for further defining/clarifying the claim language in case Applicant believe amendments would unduly narrow the scope of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 9-11 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (US2024/0160465 A1, hereafter An) in view of Bai et al. (US 2023/0004436 A1, hereafter Bai), and further in view of Periyagaram et al. (US 2021/0303533 A1, hereafter Periyagaram).
As per claim 1, An teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a computer-implemented method for pod management, the computer-implemented method comprising (fig. 1 cloud management device 100 clusters nodes; fig. 2 nodes 200 POD 210):
receiving, by the computer, an input to instantiate a second instance of the pod on the host node ([0075] perform horizontal scaling, overloaded pod [0084] determine to perform horizontal scaling, when watching level exceeds level 3 [0099] controller 126 receive resource information [0100] receive resource policy, analyze usage, calculate a watching level according to the resource usage) in response to detecting that one or more of a plurality of pod performance metrics have exceeded a corresponding maximum pod performance metric threshold level ([0075] overloaded pod [0084] pod in a cluster, watching level, exceeds level 3 [0103] watching level 1-5, threshold is set to level 3); and
directing, by the computer, the pod-warm component located on the host node to instantiate the second instance of the pod ([0084] hybrid autoscaling controller 126 perform horizontal scaling).
An doesn’t specifically teach optimal pod management, directing, by a computer, a pod-warm component located on a host node to trigger generation of a pod snapshot image of a pod in an optimal state running on the host node in response to determining that the pod has attained the optimal state; instantiate the second instance of the pod fully warm in the optimal state on the host node using the pod snapshot image of the pod to decrease startup time of the pod and increase performance of the host node.
Bai teaches optimal pod management ([0006] scheduling method, Pod), directing, by a computer, a pod-warm component located on a host node to trigger generation of a pod image of a pod in an optimal state running on the host node in response to ([0013] determining, increase number of to be scheduled pod replica) determining that the pod has attained the optimal state ([0106] pod replica, achieve, the optimal efficiency);
instantiate the second instance of the pod on the host node (fig. 1 scheduling an already run pod replica 130 [0106] pod replica, achieve, the optimal efficiency).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to combine the teachings of An with the teachings of Bai of scheduling method for pod, determining increasing number to be scheduled pod replica and pod achieving optimal efficiency to improve efficiency and allow optimal pod management, directing, by a computer, a pod-warm component located on a host node to trigger generation of a pod snapshot image of a pod in an optimal state running on the host node in response to determining that the pod has attained the optimal state to the method of An as in the instant invention.
The combination would have been obvious because applying the known method of Bai to the method of An to yield predictable result and optimal efficiency.
An and Bai, in combination, do not specifically teach pod snapshot, instantiate the pod fully warm on the host using the pod snapshot image of the pod to decrease startup time of the pod and increase performance of the host node.
Periyagaram, however, teaches generation of a pod snapshot image of a pod ([0345] creating in response to a request to snapshot, clone or otherwise copy a pod, a virtual copy of the pod [0366] snapshot of the pod, state of the pod at a point of time), instantiate the pod fully warm on the host using the pod snapshot image of the pod to decrease startup time of the pod and increase performance of the host node ([0345] [0366] virtual copy of snapshot, snapshot of the pod [0368] generate pod clones of pod snapshots [0292] pod services such as snapshots, fast and space efficient ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to combine the teachings of An and Bai with the teachings of Periyagaram of creating a snapshot in response to the request for pod snapshot and generating pod clones based pod snapshots to improve efficiency and allow pod snapshot, instantiate the pod fully warm on the host using the pod snapshot image of the pod to decrease startup time of the pod and increase performance of the host node to the method of An and Bai as in the instant invention.
The combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art because applying the known method of generating snapshot of POD and cloning pod using the generated snapshot as taught by Periyagaram to generate snapshot of pod with optimal efficiency as taught by Bai to yield predictable result of generating snapshot of the optimally efficient pod and cloning the pod using the generated optimal pod with improved efficiency.
As per claim 2, Bai teaches receiving, by the computer, the plurality of pod performance metrics corresponding to the pod running on the host node from the pod-warm component located on the host node ([0008] pod replica, utilization rate, node, type of resource ); and
determining, by the computer, that the pod has attained the optimal state based on analyzing the plurality of pod performance metrics corresponding to the pod received from the pod-warm component located on the host node ([0103] pod, optimal efficiency [0104] meeting the set condition and the characteristic demand [0106] newly created Pod replica can achieve the optimal efficiency).
As per claim 3, An teaches performing, by the computer, an analysis of the pod performance metrics corresponding to operation of a microservice provided by a containerized application running in the pod of the host node received from the pod-warm component ([0067] metric collector, collect resource information, cluster; fig. 2 cluster 11 node 200 POD 211 [0069] analytic engine, generate watching level, auto-scaling, based on collected resource information [0095] pod belong to service); and
generating, by the computer, a plurality of pod instantiation curves corresponding to the pod of the host node on a pod optimization graph based on the analysis of the pod performance metrics that correspond to the operation of the microservice provided by the containerized application running in the pod ([0067] metric collector, collect resource information, cluster; fig. 2 cluster 11 node 200 POD 211 [0069] analytic engine, generate watching level, auto-scaling, based on collected resource information [0095] pod belong to service; i.e. graph can be drawn for collected metrics).
Claim 9 recites a computer system for optimal pod management, the computer system comprising: a communication fabric; a storage device connected to the communication fabric, wherein the storage device stores program instructions; and a processor connected to the communication fabric, wherein the processor executes the program instructions to perform elements similar to claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 10 recites elements similar to claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 11 recites elements similar to claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 14 recites computer program product for optimal pod management, the computer program product comprising a computer-readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a computer to cause the computer to perform elements similar to claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 15 recites elements similar to claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 16 recites elements similar to claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Examiners Note
Applicant is further reminded of that the cited paragraphs and in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant(s) and although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider all of the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8, 12-13 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Interpreting the claims in light of the specification examiner finds the claimed invention is patentably distinct from the prior art of record. The prior art of record does not expressly teach or render obvious the invention as recited in amended independent claims.
An et al. (US2024/0160465 A1) teaches receiving, by the computer, an input to instantiate a second instance of the pod on the host node in response to detecting that one or more of a plurality of pod performance metrics have exceeded a corresponding maximum pod performance metric threshold level; and directing, by the computer, the pod-warm component located on the host node to instantiate the second instance of the pod.
Bai et al. (US 2023/0004436 A1) teaches optimal pod management, directing, by a computer, a pod-warm component located on a host node to trigger generation of a pod image of a pod in an optimal state running on the host node in response to determining that the pod has attained the optimal state; instantiate the second instance of the pod on the host node.
Periyagaram et al. (US 2021/0303533 A1) teaches generation of a pod snapshot image of a pod, instantiate the pod fully warm on the host using the pod snapshot image of the pod to decrease startup time of the pod and increase performance of the host node.
The combination of prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious the limitations of “combining pod instantiation curves to form a set of prominent pod instantiation curves based on predicted service request load and defined target objective corresponding to the pod; and generating performance curve corresponding to the pod based on the set of prominent pod instantiation curves”, when taken in the context of the claims as a whole, as recited in the dependent claims 4, 12 and 17 were not disclosed in the prior arts of record.
Conclusion
Authorization for Internet Communication
Applicant is encouraged to submit an authorization to communicate with the Examiner via the internet by making the following statement (MPEP 502.03)
“Recognizing that internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please note that the above statement can only by submitted via Central Fax (not Examiner’s Fax), Regular postal mail, or EFS Web using PTO/SB/439.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABU ZAR GHAFFARI whose telephone number is (571)270-3799. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9:00 - 17:00 Hrs.
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, Aimee Lee can be reached on 571-272-4169. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABU ZAR GHAFFARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195