DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-9, 12-16, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chaudhry et al. 20140317084 Chaudhry.
Per claim 1, Chaudhry discloses: determining an external database to be accessed for a data processing job; determining a target access object in the external database; (fig. 2, ¶0033; In step 202, database manager 110 receives a database query that is directed, at least in part to data residing in an external source.. the database query may reference the external data through a PL/SQL table function or other type of function that maps foreign data to internal database objects.) caching first metadata of the target access object from the external database into a memory of the data processing engine as second metadata; (fig. 2, ¶0035; database manager 110 determines whether the foreign data required by the received query currently reside in external data cache 120. For example, database manager 110 may query external data cache 120 for a particular external table column referenced by the query.) and accessing the second metadata from the memory to execute the data processing job (fig. 2, ¶0039; database manager 110 retrieves the foreign data from external data cache 120 during query execution, and in step 216, database manager 110 executes the query using the foreign data to generate a query result. Database manager 110 may combine the foreign data with internal data to generate the query result).
Per claim 2, Chaudhry discloses: establishing a heartbeat channel between the memory and the external database, wherein the heartbeat channel facilitates determining whether the first metadata is updated, and wherein a first quantity of heartbeat channels is equal to a second quantity of external databases; updating the first metadata to generate updated metadata; and caching, after the first metadata is updated, the updated metadata from the external database into the memory as the second metadata (¶0041-0042; the column granules are generated by a parallelization process. The parallelization process breaks an external table column into multiple parts for parallel execution so that query execution can be performed on different processors in a multi-processor database system. The manner in which the column granules are formed may vary depending on the implementation. For example, each column granule may correspond to a different offset in an external file… database manager 110 may be distributed across a plurality of database node. Each of the database nodes may comprise a different computing device executing a database server with its own external data cache that stores a different portion of the column (i.e., a different column granule). Columns that reside on different database nodes are herein referred to as parallel query ("PQ`) column granules. Each cached PQ granule may be managed independently from other granules of the same column; the examiner notes that the heartbeat channel is interpreted as establish a mapping/connection to update/read metadata for caching data from the external database.).
Per claim 5, Chaudhry discloses: wherein the at least one computing device is further configured to cause the computing device cluster to cache the updated metadata from the external database into the memory by caching, when the second metadata is inconsistent with the first metadata, the updated metadata from the external database into the memory (fig. 2 ¶0036; In step 208, database manager 110 determines whether the cached data is valid. If invalidation logic 114 has determined the foreign data is stale or otherwise invalid, then the process continues to step 210. On the other hand, if the cached data is valid, then the process continues to step 214. In some instances part of the cached data may be valid while another part may be invalid.).
Per claim 6, Chaudhry discloses: wherein caching the first metadata of the target access object into the memory comprises caching the first metadata into a target sub-catalog of a catalog in the memory (¶0029; database manager maintains external table mapping data. An external table, as used herein, is a table whose structure is defined in database 130 and/or in a database query, but whose data is stored outside database 130. For example, an external table may be created, and its structure defined, through DDL statements such as the CREATE . . . ORGANIZATION EXTERNAL statement. In another example, the external table may be created through programmatic functions, such as PL/SQL statements or other table function; ¶0031; each separate line of a file in external data source 150 may be mapped to a different table row as defined by external table metadata.).
Per claim 7, Chaudhry discloses: wherein accessing the second metadata from the memory to execute the data processing job comprises accessing the second metadata when the second metadata has been stored in the memory ((fig. 2, ¶0039; database manager 110 retrieves the foreign data from external data cache 120 during query execution, and in step 216, database manager 110 executes the query using the foreign data to generate a query result. Database manager 110 may combine the foreign data with internal data to generate the query result.).
Claims 8-9 are the device claims corresponding to the method claims 1-2 and are rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1-2.
Per claim 12, Chaudhry discloses: wherein the at least one computing device is further configured to cause the computing device cluster to cache the updated metadata from the external database into the memory by caching, when the second metadata is inconsistent with the first metadata, the updated metadata from the external database into the memory (fig. 2 ¶0036; In step 208, database manager 110 determines whether the cached data is valid. If invalidation logic 114 has determined the foreign data is stale or otherwise invalid, then the process continues to step 210. On the other hand, if the cached data is valid, then the process continues to step 214. In some instances part of the cached data may be valid while another part may be invalid.).
Per claim 13, Chaudhry discloses: wherein the at least one computing device is further configured to cause the computing device cluster to cache the first metadata of the target access object into the memory by caching the first metadata into a target sub-catalog of a catalog in the memory, wherein the catalog is configured to store third metadata of a database associated with the data processing engine, and wherein the target sub-catalog is configured to store the first metadata (¶0029; database manager maintains external table mapping data. An external table, as used herein, is a table whose structure is defined in database 130 and/or in a database query, but whose data is stored outside database 130. For example, an external table may be created, and its structure defined, through DDL statements such as the CREATE . . . ORGANIZATION EXTERNAL statement. In another example, the external table may be created through programmatic functions, such as PL/SQL statements or other table function; ¶0031; each separate line of a file in external data source 150 may be mapped to a different table row as defined by external table metadata).
Per claim 14, Chaudhry discloses: wherein the at least one computing device is further configured to cause the computing device cluster to access the second metadata from the memory to execute the data processing job by accessing the second metadata when the second metadata has been stored in the memory ((fig. 2, ¶0039; database manager 110 retrieves the foreign data from external data cache 120 during query execution, and in step 216, database manager 110 executes the query using the foreign data to generate a query result. Database manager 110 may combine the foreign data with internal data to generate the query result).
Claims 15-16 are the CRM claims corresponding to the method claims 1-2 and are rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1-2.
Claims 19-20 are the CRM claims corresponding to the device claims 13-14 and are rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 13-14.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaudhry et al. 20140317084 Chaudhry in view of Omo 2016028347 herein Omo.
Per claim 3, Chaudhry does not specifically disclose: further comprising closing the heartbeat channel in response to completion of execution of the data processing job.
However, Omo discloses: further comprising closing the heartbeat channel in response to completion of execution of the data processing job (¶0106; the job allocation unit ALCT waits for the completion of the execution of the job in a step S132, and shifts the processing to a step S134 when the execution of the job is completed. The job allocation unit ALCT instructs the node deployment unit NDPL to end (shut down or the like) the operation of the servers SV that were executing the completed job in the step S134 and shifts the processing to a step S136. The node deployment unit NDPL ends the operation of the indicated servers SV on the basis of the instruction from the job allocation unit ALCT.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chaudhry and Omo’s job allocation unit to manage available memory devices to complete jobs. Omo improves processing efficiency (¶0131; If a subsequent job having a dependency relationship can be executed by the server SV, the job allocation unit ALCT causes the server SV to execute the subsequent job having the dependency relationship by using the common memory device SSD without executing the copy processing. This further improves the processing efficiency of the job).
Claim 10 is the device claims corresponding to the method claim 3 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 3.
Claim 17 is the CRM claims corresponding to the method claim 3 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 3.
Claim(s) 4, 11 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaudhry et al. 20140317084 Chaudhry in view of Wyatt et al. 20190045007 herein Wyatt
Per claim 4, Chaudhry does not specifically disclose: wherein caching the updated metadata from the external database into the memory comprises caching, when a write-ahead log of the external database comprises an update operation on the first metadata, the updated metadata from the external database into the memory.
However, Wyatt discloses: wherein caching the updated metadata from the external database into the memory comprises caching, when a write-ahead log of the external database comprises an update operation on the first metadata, the updated metadata from the external database into the memory (¶0022; storage 120 is configured to implement a log-structured storage (e.g., a write-ahead log (WAL)) in which an active node 140 allocates a new region/portion 122 for storing new transaction data (as opposed to overwriting existing transaction data). For example, a particular region 122 may include an account balance of a user. In such an example, if a transaction request 146 is received to update the account balance, active node 140 may not modify the previously stored account balance in the particular region 122; rather, the active node 140 may submit a request 144 to write a new record identifying the new account balance in a newly allocated region 122 (or in the particular region 122)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chaudhry and Wyatt log structured storage to update database records. Wyatt redundant store prevents data loss (¶0022).
Claim 11 is the device claims corresponding to the method claim 4 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 4.
Claim 18 is the CRM claims corresponding to the method claim 4 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 4.
Remark
Examiner respectfully requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist Examiner in prosecuting the application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABOUCARR FAAL whose telephone number is (571)270-5073. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 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, Tim VO can be reached at 5712723642. 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.
BABOUCARR . FAAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2138
/BABOUCARR FAAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138
Prosecution Insights