DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-19 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2021-038080, filed on March 10, 2021.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 1, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claims 1-19 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.
The following claim language is unclear:
Claims 1, 16, 17, and 18 include the limitations of “an information processing system that operates in a moving body.” It is unclear from the context of the claim what a moving body is. Is it a vehicle? Is it a wearable device that moves as a person moves? For examination purposes, examiner interprets the limitation as a vehicle.
Additionally, claims 1, 16, and 17 include the limitations of a “a management node determination unit that executes management node determination processing of determining a management node that manages the cluster system in cooperation with the other information processing system(s); a management node processing unit that executes processing of the management node in a case where the information processing system becomes the management node by the management node determination processing.” It is unclear whether the management node has already been made. Is the management node determined from the management node determination processing different from the management node where the information processing system becomes the management node? Are they the same? For examination purposes, examiner interprets the limitations as they can be the same or different based on how many management nodes a cluster system has.
Regarding claims 2-15, they are dependent on claim 1 and fail to cure the deficiencies set forth above for claim 1. Therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 19, it is dependent on claim 18 and fails to cure the deficiencies set forth above for claim 18. Therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
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.
5. Claims 1-5, and 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishanov et al. US 20160050123 A1 in view of Cuervo Laffaye et al. US 20160323161 A1.
6. With regard to claim 1, Nishanov teaches:
An information processing system that operates in a moving body, is connected to other information processing system(s) via a network, and constitutes a cluster system with the other information processing system(s) ([0033] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the principles described herein may be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets, pagers, routers, switches, and the like. The invention may also be practiced in distributed system environments where local and remote computer systems, which are linked (either by hardwired data links, wireless data links, or by a combination of hardwired and wireless data links) through a network, both perform tasks. As such, in a distributed system environment, a computer system may include a plurality of constituent computer systems. In a distributed system environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.), the information processing system comprising:
a management node determination unit that executes management node determination processing of determining a management node that manages the cluster system in cooperation with the other information processing system(s) ([0020] In another embodiment, a computer system reassigns roles in a cluster federation. The computer system determines that a master cluster in the cluster federation is to maintain a specified number of master nodes or a specified distribution of master nodes across fault domains; [0037] Each cluster is made up of one or more physical computing nodes which may include computing systems such as server blades, hardware processors or processing cores, mainframe, embedded or other types of computing systems. Thus, clusters are collections of computing systems that work together to run workloads and fail over as needed to provide fault tolerance. The cluster federation may include various types of clusters including master clusters and worker clusters; [0038] A “master cluster” as referred to herein is a cluster that runs software components that are responsible for monitoring worker clusters and making failover decisions. A “worker cluster” as referred to herein is a cluster that runs assigned workloads; Examiner’s Note: The cluster federation is the collection of clusters. Each cluster is made up of nodes, which can be computer systems. Therefore, each individual cluster in the collection of clusters is analogous to the information processing system. The specific computer system is analogous to the management node determination unit.);
a management node processing unit that executes processing of the management node in a case where the information processing system becomes the management node by the management node determination processing ([0042] When a failed master cluster node comes back online, it informs the director 114 that it is available for monitoring by recording its state as online in the cluster database. The master learns about this and redistributes some worker clusters to a new master cluster node to better spread the monitoring and controlling load on master cluster nodes. If a failed master cluster node is not coming online in a predetermined period of time, and the number of active master cluster node falls below the desired threshold of number of active master cluster nodes, the director can choose to remove a node from a worker cluster and join it to the master cluster to a retain desired degree of redundancy in the master cluster 111.); and
a worker node processing unit that executes processing of a worker node other than the management node in a case where the information processing system becomes the worker node by the management node determination processing ([0042] The opposite operation is also possible, if the number of worker clusters monitored is small, the director can choose to remove a node from the master cluster and rejoin a worker cluster 117 (or form a new worker cluster). Worker clusters can be one node clusters or multi-node clusters. In multi-node worker clusters, a failed workload will be attempted to be restarted on other nodes of the worker cluster.).
Nishanov teaches of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that reassigns nodes to different roles. Additionally, Nishanov teaches ([0033]) [...] that the principles described herein may be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets, pagers, routers, switches, and the like. However, Nishanov does not explicitly teach that the information processing system operates in a moving body.
However, in analogous art, Cuervo Laffaye teaches:
the information processing system that operates in a moving body ([0022] By way of example and not limitation, computing device(s) 102 or 104 can include, but are not limited to, server computers or blade servers such as Web servers, map/reduce servers or other computation engines, or network-attached-storage units (e.g., 102(1)), laptop computers, thin clients, terminals, or other mobile computers (e.g., 102(N)), wearable computers such as smart watches or biometric or medical sensors, implanted computing devices such as biometric or medical sensors (e.g., 104(1), represented graphically as a clock), computer navigation client computing devices, satellite-based navigation system devices including global positioning system (GPS) devices and other satellite-based navigation system devices (e.g., 104(2), represented graphically as a PDA), tablet computers or tablet hybrid computers (e.g., 104(3)), smartphones, mobile phones, mobile phone-tablet hybrid devices, or other telecommunication devices (e.g., 104(4)), portable or console-based gaming devices or other entertainment devices such as network-enabled televisions, set-top boxes, media players, cameras, or personal video recorders (PVRs) (e.g., 104(5), represented graphically as a gamepad), automotive computers such as vehicle control systems, vehicle security systems, or electronic keys for vehicles (e.g., 104(6), represented graphically as an automobile), personal data assistants (PDAs), desktop computers (e.g., 104(K)), or integrated components for inclusion in computing devices, appliances, or other computing device(s) configured to participate in or carry out cluster management as described herein, e.g., for node selection purposes. In some examples, as indicated, computing device(s), e.g., computing devices 102(1) and 102(2), can intercommunicate to participate in or carry out node selection for a computing job as described herein. For example, computing device 102(1) can be a host-management agent (HMA) and computing device 102(2) can be a cluster-management agent (CMA) that selects nodes in the cluster to run jobs. Individual nodes can have HMAs that report the nodes' performance values to the CMA and that execute jobs as directed by the CMA. A cluster can have one or more CMAs. For example, a 100-node cluster can have two CMAs that load-balance node-selection processing between them.),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov with the teachings of Cuervo Laffaye wherein the information processing system operates in a moving body. Nishanov teaches of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that reassigns nodes to different roles. This process can be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets, pagers, routers, switches, and the like ([0033]). Nishanov does not explicitly mention moving bodies. However, in analogous art, Cuervo Laffaye teaches of a cluster system comprising of nodes. The cluster system can include different types of nodes, such as a cluster management agent that selects nodes in the cluster to run jobs. These cluster systems can be run on vehicle control systems, vehicle securing systems, or electronic keys for vehicles ([0022]). Together, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that determines roles for nodes on a moving body.
7. With regard to claim 2, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the worker node processing unit monitors a state of the management node, and in a case where the worker node processing unit or another worker node determines that the management node is not present, the management node determination unit executes the management node determination processing in cooperation with other worker nodes to determine a new management node ([0042] If a failed master cluster node is not coming online in a predetermined period of time, and the number of active master cluster node falls below the desired threshold of number of active master cluster nodes, the director can choose to remove a node from a worker cluster and join it to the master cluster to a retain desired degree of redundancy in the master cluster 111.).
8. With regard to claim 3, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the management node determination unit reconstructs the cluster system in a case where the information processing system becomes the new management node ([0051] In some embodiments, the cluster federation 110 may perform certain steps to balance processing load across the various clusters of the federation. For example, as shown in FIG. 6A, a worker role 602 may be assigned to a master node 601. Thus, as part of the worker role, various workload assignments may be hosted on the master node in the master cluster. This may be advantageously performed in cases where a master node is light on work and has available processing resources. These resources may be used to process workloads associated with the worker role. Similarly, in FIG. 6B, a master role 604 may be assigned to worker node 603. While assigned the master role 604, the worker node 603 may perform functions normally associated with a master node, such as monitoring and controlling worker nodes in a worker cluster. Thus, in this manner, the role assigning module 108 of FIG. 1 may assign and reassign roles as needed within the cluster federation 110. These roles may be reassigned according to policy or at the direction of an administrator or other user; Examiner’s Note: Balance processing load across the various clusters of the federation by assigning a worker node to be a master node is reconstructing the cluster system.).
9. With regard to claim 4, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the worker node processing unit requests the new management node to register the information processing system in the cluster system in a case where another worker node becomes the new management node ([0040] The director role 114 (or simply “director” herein) is configured to make decisions including, but not limited to, the following: 1) Which leaders are responsible for which worker clusters, 2) Which worker nodes are responsible for hosting which workloads, 3) Deciding to promote a node from a worker cluster to withdraw from its current worker cluster and join a master cluster, or to demote a master node so that it becomes a worker node and joins a worker cluster. This allows a nearly instant replacement of a failed computing node on master or worker cluster from the pool of computing nodes in their respective clusters. The director role records its decisions in a cluster database (which may be local or remote to the master cluster. Leader roles (or “leaders” herein) monitor changes to the cluster database and learn whether they need to communicate director decisions to the worker clusters they are responsible for; Examiner’s Note: Directors record decisions to promote a worker node to a master node in the database. This is analogous to registering.).
10. With regard to claim 5, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the management node processing unit regularly notifies the worker node of presence of the management node ([0041] In some embodiments, the director 114 may learn about the failure of a worker and decide on how to redistribute workloads hosted by the worker. Once the decision regarding redistribution of workloads has been made, the director will record the decision in the cluster database. Leaders may then learn about the new workload and communicate that to the worker clusters they are responsible for. In the case of a leader failure, the director may learn about it via a notification delivered by the master cluster 111 which reports on master node down or up events. When the director learns about a master node failure, the director redistributes worker cluster nodes monitored by that particular master cluster node among the remaining master cluster nodes. The director then writes this decision in the master database. Leaders will learn about the decision via database notification changes and start monitoring and controlling newly acquired worker clusters; [0048] Method 200 further includes an act of assigning a director role to a master node in the master cluster, the director role governing decisions that affect consistency within the federation, and further assigning a leader role to at least one master node which monitors and controls other master nodes in the master cluster (act 220). The role assigning module 108 of computer system 101 may assign director role 114 to master node 112B, for example, in master cluster 111.).
11. With regard to claim 9, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the management node processing unit constructs and updates the cluster system ([0046] Method 200 includes an act of identifying one or more computing nodes that are to be part of the cluster federation, the cluster federation including at least one master cluster and at least one worker cluster, the master cluster including at least one master node comprising a computing node to which a master role is assigned, the worker cluster including at least one worker node comprising a computing node to which a worker role is assigned (act 210). For example, the node identifying module of computing system 101 may identify nodes including master nodes 112A-C and worker nodes 118A-C that are to be part of cluster federation 110. The cluster federation includes a master cluster 111 and one or more worker clusters 117. One of the master nodes is assigned to be director 114 (master node 112B in FIG. 1), while the other master nodes have leader roles 113. The nodes of the cluster federation 110 may communicate with the computer system 101 via communication link 116. While shown as being separate from the cluster federation 110, it will be understood that computer system 101 may be part of the cluster federation and may itself be a master or worker node; [0051] In some embodiments, the cluster federation 110 may perform certain steps to balance processing load across the various clusters of the federation. For example, as shown in FIG. 6A, a worker role 602 may be assigned to a master node 601. Thus, as part of the worker role, various workload assignments may be hosted on the master node in the master cluster. This may be advantageously performed in cases where a master node is light on work and has available processing resources. These resources may be used to process workloads associated with the worker role. Similarly, in FIG. 6B, a master role 604 may be assigned to worker node 603. While assigned the master role 604, the worker node 603 may perform functions normally associated with a master node, such as monitoring and controlling worker nodes in a worker cluster. Thus, in this manner, the role assigning module 108 of FIG. 1 may assign and reassign roles as needed within the cluster federation 110. These roles may be reassigned according to policy or at the direction of an administrator or other user; Examiner’s Note: Balance processing load across the various clusters of the federation by assigning a worker node to be a master node is reconstructing the cluster system.).
12. With regard to claim 10, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the worker node processing unit requests the management node to register the information processing system in the cluster system ([0040] The director role 114 (or simply “director” herein) is configured to make decisions including, but not limited to, the following: 1) Which leaders are responsible for which worker clusters, 2) Which worker nodes are responsible for hosting which workloads, 3) Deciding to promote a node from a worker cluster to withdraw from its current worker cluster and join a master cluster, or to demote a master node so that it becomes a worker node and joins a worker cluster. This allows a nearly instant replacement of a failed computing node on master or worker cluster from the pool of computing nodes in their respective clusters. The director role records its decisions in a cluster database (which may be local or remote to the master cluster. Leader roles (or “leaders” herein) monitor changes to the cluster database and learn whether they need to communicate director decisions to the worker clusters they are responsible for; Examiner’s Note: Directors record decisions to promote a worker node to a master node in the database. This is analogous to registering.).
13. With regard to claim 11, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the management node processing unit further allocates a role to the worker node and instructs the worker node to execute processing ([0003] The computer system further assigns a worker agent role to at least one worker node in the worker cluster. The worker agent role receives workload assignments from the master cluster, and further assigns a worker role to at least one worker node which processes the assigned workload.).
14. With regard to claim 12, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the management node processing unit determines an application to be executed by each worker node, and instructs each worker node to execute processing of the application to be executed by the worker node ([0003] The computer system further assigns a worker agent role to at least one worker node in the worker cluster. The worker agent role receives workload assignments from the master cluster, and further assigns a worker role to at least one worker node which processes the assigned workload; Examiner’s Note: The workload is the application to be executed.).
15. With regard to claim 13, Nishanov further teaches:
wherein the worker node processing unit executes processing in accordance with an instruction from the management node ([0038] A “worker cluster” as referred to herein is a cluster that runs assigned workloads; [0053] Worker agents may be configured to communication with master agents on master nodes. The worker agent may communicate with the master agent on behalf of its corresponding worker cluster; Examiner’s Note: To be in communication with is analogous with in accordance with an instruction.).
16. With regard to claim 14, Cuervo Laffaye further teaches:
wherein at least one of the other information processing system(s) exists outside the moving body (Fig. 1; [0021] FIG. 1 shows an example environment 100 in which examples of cluster systems can operate or in which per-job node-selection methods such as those described herein can be performed. In the illustrated example, the various devices and/or components of environment 100 include computing device(s) 102(1)-102(N) (individually or collectively referred to herein with reference 102), where N is any integer greater than or equal to 1, and computing devices 104(1)-104(K) (individually or collectively referred to herein with reference 104), where K is any integer greater than or equal to 1. In some examples, N=K; in other examples, N>K or N<K. Although illustrated as, e.g., desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet computers, or cellular phones, computing device(s) 102 or 104 can include a diverse variety of device categories, classes, or types and are not limited to a particular type of device. In the illustrated example, computing device(s) 102(1)-102(N) can be computing nodes in a cluster 106, e.g., a cloud service such as MICROSOFT AZURE. In the illustrated example, computing device(s) 104 can be clients of cluster 106 and can submit jobs to cluster 106 and/or receive job results from cluster 106. Computing devices 102(1)-102(N) in cluster 106 can, e.g., share resources, balance load, increase performance, or provide fail-over support or redundancy. Computing devices 104 can additionally or alternatively operate in a cluster or grouped configuration; [0027] Still referring to the example of FIG. 1, computing device 102(2) can include one or more processing unit(s) 112 operably connected to one or more computer-readable media 114 such as via a bus 116, which in some instances can include one or more of a system bus, a data bus, an address bus, a Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) Express (PCIe) bus, a PCI bus, a Mini-PCI bus, and any variety of local, peripheral, or independent buses, or any combination thereof. In some examples, plural processing units 112 can exchange data through an internal interface bus (e.g., PCIe), rather than or in addition to network 108. While the processing units 112 are described as residing on the computing device 102(2), in this example, the processing units 112 can also reside on different computing device(s) 102 or 104 in some examples. In some examples, at least two of the processing units 112 can reside on different computing device(s) 102 or 104. In such examples, multiple processing units 112 on the same computing device 102 or 104 can use a bus 116 of the computing device 102 or 104 to exchange data, while processing units 112 on different computing device(s) 102 or 104 can exchange data via network(s) 108; Examiner’s Note: Fig. 1 shows different computing devices that are connected through a network and can exchange data through the network. They can be outside the moving body, such as on a cloud.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov with the teachings of Cuervo Laffaye wherein at least one of the other information processing system(s) exists outside the moving body. Nishanov teaches of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that reassigns nodes to different roles. This process can be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets, pagers, routers, switches, and the like ([0033]). Nishanov does not explicitly mention moving bodies. However, in analogous art, Cuervo Laffaye teaches of a cluster system comprising of nodes. The cluster system can include different types of nodes, such as a cluster management agent that selects nodes in the cluster to run jobs. These cluster systems can be run on vehicle control systems, vehicle securing systems, or electronic keys for vehicles ([0022]). Moreover, Cuervo Laffaye teaches that the computing devices can be outside of the moving body, for example cloud computing. Cloud computing allows for computing resources to be provided as services rather than a deliverable product. For example, in a cloud-computing environment, computing power, software, information, and/or network connectivity are provided (for example, through a rental agreement) over a network, such as the Internet, as discussed in Cuervo Laffaye ([0001]).
17. With regard to claim 15, Cuervo Laffaye further teaches:
wherein the at least one of the other information processing system(s) is present on a cloud ([0014] Examples described herein provide techniques and constructs to improve the selection of computing nodes to run computing jobs by more effectively determining which nodes have sufficient resource capacity to effectively execute the jobs. The computing nodes can be included, e.g., in a cluster such as a cloud service; [0021] FIG. 1 shows an example environment 100 in which examples of cluster systems can operate or in which per-job node-selection methods such as those described herein can be performed. In the illustrated example, the various devices and/or components of environment 100 include computing device(s) 102(1)-102(N) (individually or collectively referred to herein with reference 102), where N is any integer greater than or equal to 1, and computing devices 104(1)-104(K) (individually or collectively referred to herein with reference 104), where K is any integer greater than or equal to 1. In some examples, N=K; in other examples, N>K or N<K. Although illustrated as, e.g., desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet computers, or cellular phones, computing device(s) 102 or 104 can include a diverse variety of device categories, classes, or types and are not limited to a particular type of device. In the illustrated example, computing device(s) 102(1)-102(N) can be computing nodes in a cluster 106, e.g., a cloud service such as MICROSOFT AZURE.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov with the teachings of Cuervo Laffaye wherein the at least one of the other information processing system(s) is present on a cloud. Nishanov teaches of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that reassigns nodes to different roles. This process can be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, tablets, pagers, routers, switches, and the like ([0033]). Nishanov does not explicitly mention moving bodies. However, in analogous art, Cuervo Laffaye teaches of a cluster system comprising of nodes. The cluster system can include different types of nodes, such as a cluster management agent that selects nodes in the cluster to run jobs. These cluster systems can be run on vehicle control systems, vehicle securing systems, or electronic keys for vehicles ([0022]). Moreover, Cuervo Laffaye teaches that the computing devices can be computing nodes in a cloud service ([0021]). Cloud computing allows for computing resources to be provided as services rather than a deliverable product. For example, in a cloud-computing environment, computing power, software, information, and/or network connectivity are provided (for example, through a rental agreement) over a network, such as the Internet, as discussed in Cuervo Laffaye ([0001]).
18. Regarding claim 16, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
19. Regarding claim 17, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
20. Regarding claim 18, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claims 1 and 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
21. Regarding claim 19, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claims 2 and 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
22. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishanov et al. US 20160050123 A1 and Cuervo Laffaye et al. US 20160323161 A1, as applied in Claim 1, in view further of Muller et al. US 20130198309 A1.
23. With regard to claim 6, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach the information processing system according to claim 1 but fail to explicitly teach wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node on a basis of a priority set in advance.
However, in analogous art, Muller teaches:
wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node on a basis of a priority set in advance ([0046] FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating a method of determining a master node when the current master node stops. In one embodiment, the cluster without shared storage contains a single master node and a plurality of slave nodes. For various reasons, the master node may stop functioning 510. For example, a master node may stop functioning in the cluster because of a hardware failure, a software exception, a power outage, or loss of connectivity with a communications network. When the current master node stops functioning 510, other nodes (currently slave nodes) in the cluster compete to determine which node should become the new master node 520. For example, in one embodiment, each of the other nodes in the cluster communicates with each other in order to determine which node has the highest priority setting. In this embodiment, once the highest priority node is determined, that node in the cluster is set as the master node 530 and the other nodes remain slave nodes. In one embodiment, there may be two or more nodes that have the same priority setting that is higher than the other nodes. In this circumstance, software executed on one or more of the nodes may determine which of the nodes should be set as the master node. For example, the new master node may be determined based upon one or more factors such as the speed of the processor(s), the number of processors(s), the amount of memory, the amount of free memory, or the load of the processor(s) between the nodes that have the same highest priority setting.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye with the teachings of Muller wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node on a basis of a priority set in advance. Together, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that determines roles for nodes on a moving body. Similarly, Muller teaches of determining a master node with the current master node stops. For example, a master node may stop functioning in the cluster because of a hardware failure, a software exception, a power outage, or loss of connectivity with a communications network ([0046]). The node with the highest priority becomes the new master node. This ensures that a new master node is chosen in the event of a failure; therefore, allowing the environment to combat technical failures.
24. With regard to claim 7, Muller further teaches:
wherein the priority is set on a basis of at least one of capabilities, processing contents, intended uses, or operating environments of the information processing system and the other information processing system(s) ([0046] FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating a method of determining a master node when the current master node stops. In one embodiment, the cluster without shared storage contains a single master node and a plurality of slave nodes. For various reasons, the master node may stop functioning 510. For example, a master node may stop functioning in the cluster because of a hardware failure, a software exception, a power outage, or loss of connectivity with a communications network. When the current master node stops functioning 510, other nodes (currently slave nodes) in the cluster compete to determine which node should become the new master node 520. For example, in one embodiment, each of the other nodes in the cluster communicates with each other in order to determine which node has the highest priority setting. In this embodiment, once the highest priority node is determined, that node in the cluster is set as the master node 530 and the other nodes remain slave nodes. In one embodiment, there may be two or more nodes that have the same priority setting that is higher than the other nodes. In this circumstance, software executed on one or more of the nodes may determine which of the nodes should be set as the master node. For example, the new master node may be determined based upon one or more factors such as the speed of the processor(s), the number of processors(s), the amount of memory, the amount of free memory, or the load of the processor(s) between the nodes that have the same highest priority setting.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye with the teachings of Muller wherein the priority is set on a basis of at least one of capabilities, processing contents, intended uses, or operating environments of the information processing system and the other information processing system(s). Together, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that determines roles for nodes on a moving body. Similarly, Muller teaches of determining a master node with the current master node stops. The node with the highest priority becomes the new master node. In the event that two nodes have the same priority, the new master node may be determined based upon one or more factors such as the speed of the processor(s), the number of processors(s), the amount of memory, the amount of free memory, or the load of the processor(s) between the nodes that have the same highest priority setting ([0046]). This ensures that the new master node was chosen based on its capabilities; therefore, ensuring an optimal execution environment.
25. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishanov et al. US 20160050123 A1 and Cuervo Laffaye et al. US 20160323161 A1, as applied in Claim 1, in view further of Welsch et al. US 20210136146 A1.
26. With regard to claim 8, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach the information processing system according to claim 1 but fail to explicitly teach wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node from among candidates for the management node by a majority decision of the information processing system and the other information processing system(s).
However, in analogous art, Welsch teaches:
wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node from among candidates for the management node by a majority decision of the information processing system and the other information processing system(s) ([0003] One general aspect includes determining nodes of a cluster, each of the nodes having a unique identifier and a cluster identifier for the cluster; determining a voting configuration for the cluster, the voting configuration defining a quorum of master-eligible nodes of the nodes, the voting configuration being adaptable so as to maintain an optimal level of fault tolerance for the cluster; and electing one of the master-eligible nodes as a master node; [0030] Decisions are made only after a majority of the nodes in the voting configuration responds. A quorum is therefore defined to be a majority of the voting configuration.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye with the teachings of Welsch wherein the management node determination unit determines the management node from among candidates for the management node by a majority decision of the information processing system and the other information processing system(s). Together, Nishanov and Cuervo Laffaye teach of a cluster system with nodes and computer systems that determines roles for nodes on a moving body. Similarly, Welsch teaches of electing a master-eligible node as a master node. This is similar to the determining of Nishanov. Moreover, Welsch teaches of choosing the master node based on a majority vote of the nodes. This ensures that the master node that is chosen is due to a majority of the voting configuration; therefore, establishing an optimal level of fault tolerance for the cluster. ([0003]; [0030]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AN-AN N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6147. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 ET.
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 LI can be reached at (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 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.
/AN-AN NGOC NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2195
/Aimee Li/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2195