Detailed Action
Claims 1-10, and 12-20 are pending and are examined.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 11 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected set of claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2026-07-29.
Applicant's election with traverse of 1-10, and 12-20, in the reply filed on 2026-07-29 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no burden to search the non-elected claims. This is not found persuasive because searching the non-elected claims would impose a serious burden as their materially distinct limitations require separate classifications, search strategies, prior art fields, and reference combinations beyond those need for the elected claims. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-10 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Claims 12-20 are directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claims 1 and 12 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe transaction dependency management, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including following rules or instructions of grouping and selecting transactions according to dependencies. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
Claim 1:
A computer-implemented method, applied to a first node in a blockchain system, wherein the first node comprises a control process and N computing processes, and the computer- implemented method comprises:
acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups, wherein the M transaction groups are obtained by grouping a plurality of transactions in a target block based on respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions, and M and N are positive integers;
in response to determining that there is another block that is in an execution phase, acquiring, by the control process, a pre-execution read-write set of a transaction in the another block, and sending a transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre- execution read-write set to different computing processes in the N computing processes;
and in response to receiving one of the M transaction groups, executing, by a first computing process, each transaction in the received transaction group.
Claim 12:
A first node in a blockchain system, wherein the first node comprises one or more processors; and one or more tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, perform one or more processes comprising:
a control process and N computing processes, wherein: the control process acquires M transaction groups, wherein the M transaction groups are obtained by grouping a plurality of transactions in a target block based on respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions, and M and N are positive integers;
in response to determining that there is another block that is in an execution phase, the control process acquires a pre-execution read-write set of a transaction in the another block, and sends a transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set to different computing processes in the N computing processes;
and in response to receiving any one of the M transaction groups, a first computing process executes each transaction in the received transaction group.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Here, the additional elements of a blockchain, a node, individually and in combination, are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional elements merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). The description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea. The blockchain may be a generic and conventional blockchain (See Spec. 0003). The node may be a generic and conventional node (See Spec. 0028).
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed previously, the description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0003 and 0028). As such, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claims 2-10, and 13-20 have also been analyzed. However, the subject matter of these claims also fails to recite patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons:
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the pre-execution read- write set of the transaction involves a contract parameter, wherein: in the M transaction groups, transactions involving contract parameters of different contracts are divided into different transaction groups; and when the acquired pre-execution read-write set involves a contract parameter of a first contract, the transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set comprises a transaction group that comprises a transaction not involving the contract parameter of the first contract.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein: a world state maintained by the blockchain system corresponds to a state trie, leaf nodes of the state trie comprise a contract account node and a plurality of contract parameter nodes, wherein the contract account node is configured to record a contract account of a first contract deployed in the blockchain system, the plurality of contract parameter nodes are each configured to record state values of different contract parameters in the first contract, and update of the contract account node and update of the plurality of contract parameter nodes do not affect each other; and the pre-execution read-write set of the transaction involves a contract parameter, and wherein: in the M transaction groups, transactions involving different contracts or involving different contract parameters of a same contract are divided into different transaction groups; and when the acquired pre-execution read-write set involves a contract parameter of the first contract, the transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set comprises a transaction group that comprises a transaction not involving the first contract or involving the first contract but not involving the contract parameter.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the first node further comprises a storage process; and the computer-implemented method further comprises: sending, by the first computing process, a state value of the contract parameter to the storage process; and updating, by the storage process based on the state value of the contract parameter, a state value recorded by a contract parameter node corresponding to the contract parameter in the state trie.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein a state value of the contract parameter is recorded in a corresponding contract parameter node as a key-value pair, wherein a key of the contract parameter is calculated based on contract information of the first contract and parameter information of the contract parameter.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the contract account node does not record a value of a Storage Root field.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: acquiring, by the control process, the M transaction groups based on group information from a second node in the blockchain system.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein: the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: pre-executing, by the control process, the plurality of transactions, and dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on an obtained pre-execution read-write set; or the first node further comprises a first consensus process; and the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: dividing, by the control process, the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on the respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions received by the first consensus process from a second node in the blockchain system.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups comprises: determining a read-write set conflict relationship among the plurality of transactions based on the respective pre-executed read-write sets of the plurality of transactions; determining a pre-and-post dependency relationship of at least some of the plurality of transactions based on the read-write set conflict relationship; and grouping the plurality of transactions based on the pre-and-post dependency relationship to obtain the M transaction groups.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
further comprising: concurrently executing, by the first computing process, transactions in a plurality of received transaction groups through a plurality of threads.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the first computing process concurrently executes transactions in a plurality of received transaction groups through a plurality of threads.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein: a world state maintained by the blockchain system corresponds to a state trie, leaf nodes of the state trie comprise a contract account node and a plurality of contract parameter nodes, the contract account node is configured to record a contract account of a first contract deployed in the blockchain system, the plurality of contract parameter nodes are each configured to record state values of different contract parameters in the first contract, and update of the contract account node and update of the plurality of contract parameter nodes do not affect each other; and the pre-execution read-write set of the transaction involves a contract parameter, wherein: in the M transaction groups, transactions involving different contracts or involving different contract parameters of a same contract are divided into different transaction groups; and when the acquired pre-execution read-write set involves a contract parameter of the first contract, the transaction group irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set among the M transaction groups comprises a transaction group that comprises a transaction not involving the first contract or involving the first contract but not involving the contract parameter.
Claim 15 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the one or more processes further comprise a storage process, wherein: the first computing process sends a state value of the contract parameter to the storage process; and the storage process updates, based on the state value of the contract parameter, a state value recorded by a contract parameter node corresponding to the contract parameter in the state trie.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein a state value of the contract parameter is recorded in a corresponding contract parameter node as a key-value pair, wherein a key of the contract parameter is calculated based on contract information of the first contract and parameter information of the contract parameter.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the contract account node does not record a value of a Storage Root field.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein: the control process acquires the M transaction groups by: pre-executing, by the control process, the plurality of transactions, and dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on an obtained pre-execution read-write set.
Claim 19 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein the dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups comprises: determining a read-write set conflict relationship among the plurality of transactions based on the respective pre-executed read-write sets of the plurality of transactions; determining a pre-and-post dependency relationship of at least some of the plurality of transactions based on the read-write set conflict relationship; and grouping the plurality of transactions based on the pre-and-post dependency relationship to obtain the M transaction groups.
Claim 20 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein: the one or more processes further comprise a first consensus process; and the control process acquires the M transaction groups by: dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on the respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions received by the first consensus process from a second node in the blockchain system.
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 1-10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US20220067726A1) (hereinafter “Liu”) in view of Wagner et al. (US20230060916A1) (hereinafter “Wagner”).
As per Claim 1 and 12, Liu teaches:
A computer-implemented method, applied to a first node in a blockchain system, wherein the first node comprises a control process and N computing processes, and the computer- implemented method comprises: (“As shown in FIG. 1, the Fabric blockchain includes the following multiple types of nodes: a client node 11, peers 12, an orderer 13, etc. The peers 12 further include an endorser 121, a committer 122, etc. The Fabric blockchain includes multiple channels. Each channel has closed ledger data and a chain code of the channel. The chain code is a smart contract in the Fabric blockchain. The peer 12 can choose which channels to join, and the peer 12 can join the channel after the identity of the peer 12 is verified by a peer existing in the channel.” (Para. 0034); “The method shown in FIG. 2 is performed by one of multiple threads in a blockchain node device, and the multiple threads can concurrently perform the method shown in FIG. 2, to improve the efficiency of grouping multiple transactions.” (Para. 0044); “In the solution for grouping transactions in a blockchain according to the implementations of the specification, multiple threads can concurrently change a belonging array and an associative array in a lock-free way, so that multiple transactions can be grouped based on the associative array. In this process, no search for a complex data structure is involved, and the full advantage of multi-CPU performance can be taken.” (Para. 0019))
acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups, wherein the M transaction groups are obtained by grouping a plurality of transactions in a target block based on respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions, and M and N are positive integers; (“For example, in a Hyperledger Fabric blockchain (hereinafter referred to as a Fabric blockchain), an endorser pre-executes each transaction to generate a read-write set of each transaction. The read-write set includes a variable read or written in the process of pre-executing the transaction. When a committer in the Fabric blockchain performs validation on a block, the committer executes transactions in the block, and determines whether a read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed based on a current world state. If the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, the world state is changed accordingly.” (Para. 0002); “Before a batch of transactions are executed, transactions with overlapping read-write sets are placed in the same group based on an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of the transactions, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups. In traditional solutions, a single thread groups transactions based on overlapping between read-write sets of transactions. When there are tens of thousands of transactions to be grouped, hundreds of milliseconds are needed for the grouping algorithm, which greatly restricts the throughput rate of the whole system.” (Para. 0003); “ In this case, the two transactions can be concurrently executed. In other words, to determine whether transactions can be concurrently executed, it needs to be determined whether the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of the transactions. In this implementation of the present specification, multiple threads concurrently change a variable belonging array and a transaction associative array, determine an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of all the transactions for variable access based on the transaction associative array, and place transactions with overlapping read-write sets in one group, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups, so that transactions in each group are concurrently executed.” (Para. 0037))
in response to receiving one of the M transaction groups, executing, by a first computing process, each transaction in the received transaction group. (“ To ensure that all the full nodes have consistent data, concurrent processing is performed on multiple transactions in the blockchain on the premise that there is no data dependency between the concurrently executed transactions. For example, in a Hyperledger Fabric blockchain (hereinafter referred to as a Fabric blockchain), an endorser pre-executes each transaction to generate a read-write set of each transaction. The read-write set includes a variable read or written in the process of pre-executing the transaction.” (Para. 0002); “In this case, the two transactions can be concurrently executed. In other words, to determine whether transactions can be concurrently executed, it needs to be determined whether the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of the transactions. In this implementation of the present specification, multiple threads concurrently change a variable belonging array and a transaction associative array, determine an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of all the transactions for variable access based on the transaction associative array, and place transactions with overlapping read-write sets in one group, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups, so that transactions in each group are concurrently executed.” (Para. 0037)).
Liu does not disclose:
“in response to determining that there is another block that is in an execution phase, acquiring, by the control process, a pre-execution read-write set of a transaction in the another block, and sending a transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre- execution read-write set to different computing processes in the N computing processes; and” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 1, Wagner in the analogous art of executing smart contracts, teaches: “acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups, wherein the M transaction groups are obtained by grouping a plurality of transactions in a target block based on respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions, and M and N are positive integers; in response to determining that there is another block that is in an execution phase, acquiring, by the control process, a pre-execution read-write set of a transaction in the another block, and sending a transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre- execution read-write set to different computing processes in the N computing processes; and”. (“For example, an instance of the consensus verify function 206 may operate with respect to a later block (e.g., via interactions 1-8) while an instance of the consensus apply function 207 occurs with respect to an earlier block (e.g., via interactions 9-10). In still another embodiment, multiple instances of the consensus verify function 206, multiple instances of the consensus apply function 208, or both, occur concurrently. For example, a second instance of the consensus verify function 206 may verify that a set of transactions for a later block can be applied independently to transactions for an earlier block (e.g., due to satisfaction of commutativity and associativity tests between the two sets) handled by a first instance of the consensus verify function 206, thus enabling parallelization within the consensus node 210. Because the number of parallel implementations of these functions is effectively unbounded (given appropriate transactions in the queue 204), commitment of blocks to the chain can occur very rapidly relative to alternative blockchain implementations. In this way, the total volume of transactions that may be handled by a participant node 210 can scale to very large levels. This parallelism is in stark contrast to prior blockchain techniques, in which individual nodes are associated with individual physical computing hosts, and thus limited to processing capabilities of such individual hosts, and in which creation of blocks is often restricted to a fully serialized algorithm, such that computation related to each block must complete before computation for a subsequent block can begin.” (Para. 0074)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Liu with the technique of Wagner to include sending transactions groups whose pre-execution read-write sets do not conflict with the executing block to different computing processes. Therefore, the incentives of enabling greater parallelization and avoiding unnecessary serialization of independent transactions provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
As per Claim 2, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the pre-execution read- write set of the transaction involves a contract parameter, wherein: in the M transaction groups, transactions involving contract parameters of different contracts are divided into different transaction groups; and when the acquired pre-execution read-write set involves a contract parameter of a first contract, the transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set comprises a transaction group that comprises a transaction not involving the contract parameter of the first contract. (“The chain code is a smart contract in the Fabric blockchain. The peer 12 can choose which channels to join, and the peer 12 can join the channel after the identity of the peer 12 is verified by a peer existing in the channel.” (Para. 0034); “for a Fabric blockchain, reading and/or writing variable k0 to variable k3 is recorded in a read-write set of transaction 5, and for an Ethereum blockchain, transaction 5 includes a change operation of account states of four accounts respectively corresponding to variable k0 to variable k3. Therefore, after obtaining transaction 5, the thread sequentially obtains the four variables, and performs processing separately. For example, the thread first obtains variable k0, and variable k0 corresponds to belonging variable B0 in the belonging array.” (Para. 0051); “Before a batch of transactions are executed, transactions with overlapping read-write sets are placed in the same group based on an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of the transactions, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups.” (Para. 0003))
As per Claim 3 and 14, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein: a world state maintained by the blockchain system corresponds to a state trie, leaf nodes of the state trie comprise a contract account node and a plurality of contract parameter nodes, wherein the contract account node is configured to record a contract account of a first contract deployed in the blockchain system, the plurality of contract parameter nodes are each configured to record state values of different contract parameters in the first contract, and update of the contract account node and update of the plurality of contract parameter nodes do not affect each other; and (“ When a committer in the Fabric blockchain performs validation on a block, the committer executes transactions in the block, and determines whether a read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed based on a current world state. If the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, the world state is changed accordingly. Therefore, if no read-write conflict exists between accessed variables of two transactions, the change of the world state caused by one transaction does not affect execution of the other transaction, so the two transactions can be concurrently executed. If a read-write conflict exists between accessed variables of two transactions, the two transactions can only be serially executed.” (Para. 0002); “The chain code is a smart contract in the Fabric blockchain. The peer 12 can choose which channels to join, and the peer 12 can join the channel after the identity of the peer 12 is verified by a peer existing in the channel.” (Para. 0034); “Assume that variable k0 to variable k3 are accessed in transaction 5. In other words, for a Fabric blockchain, reading and/or writing variable k0 to variable k3 is recorded in a read-write set of transaction 5, and for an Ethereum blockchain, transaction 5 includes a change operation of account states of four accounts respectively corresponding to variable k0 to variable k3.” (Para. 0051))
the pre-execution read-write set of the transaction involves a contract parameter, and wherein: in the M transaction groups, transactions involving different contracts or involving different contract parameters of a same contract are divided into different transaction groups; and when the acquired pre-execution read-write set involves a contract parameter of the first contract, the transaction group among the M transaction groups that is irrelevant to the acquired pre-execution read-write set comprises a transaction group that comprises a transaction not involving the first contract or involving the first contract but not involving the contract parameter. (“When a committer in the Fabric blockchain performs validation on a block, the committer executes transactions in the block, and determines whether a read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed based on a current world state. If the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, the world state is changed accordingly. Therefore, if no read-write conflict exists between accessed variables of two transactions, the change of the world state caused by one transaction does not affect execution of the other transaction, so the two transactions can be concurrently executed. If a read-write conflict exists between accessed variables of two transactions, the two transactions can only be serially executed.” (Para. 0002); “for an Ethereum blockchain, transaction 5 includes a change operation of account states of four accounts respectively corresponding to variable k0 to variable k3. Therefore, after obtaining transaction 5, the thread sequentially obtains the four variables, and performs processing separately. For example, the thread first obtains variable k0, and variable k0 corresponds to belonging variable B0 in the belonging array.” (Para. 0051); “ the write set is also recorded in the form of a key-value pair.” (Para. 0035))
As per Claim 4 and 15, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 3, wherein the first node further comprises a storage process; and the computer-implemented method further comprises: sending, by the first computing process, a state value of the contract parameter to the storage process; and (“An aspect of the present specification provides a computing device, including a storage and a processor. The storage stores executable code, and the processor implements any one of the above methods when executing the executable code.” (Para. 0018); “The method shown in FIG. 2 is performed by one of multiple threads in a blockchain node device, and the multiple threads can concurrently perform the method shown in FIG. 2, to improve the efficiency of grouping multiple transactions. The multiple transactions are multiple transactions to be executed, for example, for multiple transactions in one block in the blockchain, the multiple transactions have transaction numbers (or numbering values of transactions), and the transaction numbers/numbering values of transactions are determined based on a predetermined rule, for example, based on the amount of gas provided by the transactions, or a time sequence for proposing transaction proposals of the transactions.” (Para. 0044); “The write set is a value pre-written to a variable by the endorser in the transaction pre-execution process, that is, the writing to the variable is only recorded in the write set without changing a world state. Similarly, the write set is also recorded in the form of a key-value pair.” (Para. 0035))
updating, by the storage process based on the state value of the contract parameter, a state value recorded by a contract parameter node corresponding to the contract parameter in the state trie. (“An aspect of the present specification provides a computing device, including a storage and a processor. The storage stores executable code, and the processor implements any one of the above methods when executing the executable code.” (Para. 0018); “The write set is a value pre-written to a variable by the endorser in the transaction pre-execution process.” (Para. 0035); “If the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, the world state is changed accordingly.” (Para. 0002))
As per Claim 5 and 16, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 3, wherein a state value of the contract parameter is recorded in a corresponding contract parameter node as a key-value pair, wherein a key of the contract parameter is calculated based on contract information of the first contract and parameter information of the contract parameter. (“The pre-execution result is a read-write set in the transaction pre-execution process. FIG. 1 shows an example of the read-write set. The read-write set includes a read set (Rset) and a write set (Wset). The read set is a variable value read by the endorser in the transaction pre-execution process, and is recorded in the form of a key-value pair. As shown in FIG. 1, “123abc456:2” in the read set indicates that the value of the read variable 123abc456 (Key) is 2, where 123abc456 is a variable name. The write set is a value pre-written to a variable by the endorser in the transaction pre-execution process, that is, the writing to the variable is only recorded in the write set without changing a world state. Similarly, the write set is also recorded in the form of a key-value pair.” (Para. 0035); “As shown in FIG. 3, in the belonging array, the value of B2 is 2, indicating that transaction 2 or an associated transaction of transaction 2 includes access to variable k2, in other words, variable k2 belongs to transaction 2 or the associated transaction of transaction 2. The value of B3 is 7, indicating that transaction 7 or an associated transaction of transaction 7 includes access to variable k3, in other words, variable k3 belongs to transaction 7 or the associated transaction of transaction 7. It can be understood that although multiple belonging variables respectively corresponding to the transactions accessed in the multiple transactions are shown in the form of belonging array, the present specification is not limited thereto. For example, a name hash value of a variable accessed in a transaction is used as a belonging variable address of the variable. In other words, in this case, each transaction variable has a scattered belonging variable address.” (Para. 0048))
As per Claim 6 and 17, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 3, wherein the contract account node does not record a value of a Storage Root field. (“Assume that variable k0 to variable k3 are accessed in transaction 5. In other words, for a Fabric blockchain, reading and/or writing variable k0 to variable k3 is recorded in a read-write set of transaction 5, and for an Ethereum blockchain, transaction 5 includes a change operation of account states of four accounts respectively corresponding to variable k0 to variable k3.” (Para. 0051); “The write set is a value pre-written to a variable by the endorser in the transaction pre-execution process, that is, the writing to the variable is only recorded in the write set without changing a world state. Similarly, the write set is also recorded in the form of a key-value pair.” (Para. 0035); “After receiving the block, the committer 122 executes the transaction, that is, verifies, based on the world state, whether the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, marks the execution state (i.e., success or failure) of the read-write set in each transaction of the block, and then adds the block to ledger data of the current node (i.e., committing the block).” (Para. 0036))
As per Claim 7, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: acquiring, by the control process, the M transaction groups based on group information from a second node in the blockchain system. (“After receiving a transaction pre-execution result and a signature from each endorsement node 121, the client node 11 sends transaction information to the orderer 13 to commit the transaction, where the transaction information includes the transaction proposal of the transaction, the transaction pre-execution result, and the signature. The orderer 13 is configured to sort transactions, pack sorted transactions in a block at fixed intervals, and send the block to each committer 122 in the blockchain. After receiving the block, the committer 122 executes the transaction, that is, verifies, based on the world state, whether the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, marks the execution state (i.e., success or failure) of the read-write set in each transaction of the block, and then adds the block to ledger data of the current node (i.e., committing the block).” (Para. 0036); “ This is achieved in PBFT by assuming that faults will occur (assuming the existence of independent node failures, and/or manipulated messages sent by consensus nodes). In PBFT, the consensus nodes are provided in a sequence that includes a primary consensus node and backup consensus nodes. The primary consensus node is periodically changed. Transactions are added to the blockchain by all consensus nodes within the blockchain network reaching an agreement as to the world state of the blockchain network. In this process, messages are transmitted between consensus nodes, and each consensus nodes proves that a message is received from a specified peer node and verifies that the message was not modified during transmission.” (Para. 0098)).
As per Claim 8 and 18, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein: the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: pre-executing, by the control process, the plurality of transactions, and dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on an obtained pre-execution read-write set; or the first node further comprises a first consensus process; and the acquiring, by the control process, M transaction groups comprises: dividing, by the control process, the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on the respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions received by the first consensus process from a second node in the blockchain system. (“For example, in a Hyperledger Fabric blockchain (hereinafter referred to as a Fabric blockchain), an endorser pre-executes each transaction to generate a read-write set of each transaction. The read-write set includes a variable read or written in the process of pre-executing the transaction. When a committer in the Fabric blockchain performs validation on a block, the committer executes transactions in the block, and determines whether a read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed based on a current world state.” (Para. 0002); “Before a batch of transactions are executed, transactions with overlapping read-write sets are placed in the same group based on an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of the transactions, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups. In traditional solutions, a single thread groups transactions based on overlapping between read-write sets of transactions. When there are tens of thousands of transactions to be grouped, hundreds of milliseconds are needed for the grouping algorithm, which greatly restricts the throughput rate of the whole system.” (Para. 0003); “In this implementation of the present specification, multiple threads concurrently change a variable belonging array and a transaction associative array, determine an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of all the transactions for variable access based on the transaction associative array, and place transactions with overlapping read-write sets in one group, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups, so that transactions in each group are concurrently executed.” (Para. 0037))
As per Claim 9 and 19, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 8, wherein the dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups comprises: determining a read-write set conflict relationship among the plurality of transactions based on the respective pre-executed read-write sets of the plurality of transactions; (“ an endorser pre-executes each transaction to generate a read-write set of each transaction. The read-write set includes a variable read or written in the process of pre-executing the transaction. When a committer in the Fabric blockchain performs validation on a block, the committer executes transactions in the block, and determines whether a read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed based on a current world state. If the read-write set of each transaction in the block can be successfully executed, the world state is changed accordingly.” (Para. 0002); “ It can be learned from this example that when the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of transaction 1 and transaction 2, it can be determined that a read-write conflict exists between transaction 1 and transaction 2, and therefore, transaction 1 and transaction 2 need to be serially executed based on a sequence of transaction 1 and transaction 2. If the same variable is not recorded in read-write sets of two transactions, no read-write conflict exists. In this case, the two transactions can be concurrently executed. In other words, to determine whether transactions can be concurrently executed, it needs to be determined whether the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of the transactions. In this implementation of the present specification, multiple threads concurrently change a variable belonging array and a transaction associative array, determine an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of all the transactions for variable access based on the transaction associative array, and place transactions with overlapping read-write sets in one group, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups, so that transactions in each group are concurrently executed.” (Para. 0037)
determining a pre-and-post dependency relationship of at least some of the plurality of transactions based on the read-write set conflict relationship; and grouping the plurality of transactions based on the pre-and-post dependency relationship to obtain the M transaction groups. (“It can be learned from this example that when the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of transaction 1 and transaction 2, it can be determined that a read-write conflict exists between transaction 1 and transaction 2, and therefore, transaction 1 and transaction 2 need to be serially executed based on a sequence of transaction 1 and transaction 2.” (Para. 0037); “Before a batch of transactions are executed, transactions with overlapping read-write sets are placed in the same group based on an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of the transactions, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups. In traditional solutions, a single thread groups transactions based on overlapping between read-write sets of transactions. When there are tens of thousands of transactions to be grouped, hundreds of milliseconds are needed for the grouping algorithm, which greatly restricts the throughput rate of the whole system.” (Para. 0003)).
As per Claim 10 and 13, Liu teaches:
The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, further comprising: concurrently executing, by the first computing process, transactions in a plurality of received transaction groups through a plurality of threads. (“To ensure that all the full nodes have consistent data, concurrent processing is performed on multiple transactions in the blockchain on the premise that there is no data dependency between the concurrently executed transactions. For example, in a Hyperledger Fabric blockchain (hereinafter referred to as a Fabric blockchain), an endorser pre-executes each transaction to generate a read-write set of each transaction. The read-write set includes a variable read or written in the process of pre-executing the transaction.” (Para. 0002); “In this case, the two transactions can be concurrently executed. In other words, to determine whether transactions can be concurrently executed, it needs to be determined whether the same variable is recorded in read-write sets of the transactions. In this implementation of the present specification, multiple threads concurrently change a variable belonging array and a transaction associative array, determine an overlapping relationship between read-write sets of all the transactions for variable access based on the transaction associative array, and place transactions with overlapping read-write sets in one group, which can ensure that there is no data dependency between transactions in different groups, so that transactions in each group are concurrently executed.” (Para. 0037); “In the solution for grouping transactions in a blockchain according to the implementations of the specification, multiple threads can concurrently change a belonging array and an associative array in a lock-free way, so that multiple transactions can be grouped based on the associative array. In this process, no search for a complex data structure is involved, and the full advantage of multi-CPU performance can be taken.” (Para. 0082))
As per Claim 20, Liu teaches:
The first node according to claim 12, wherein: the one or more processes further comprise a first consensus process; and the control process acquires the M transaction groups by: dividing the plurality of transactions into the M transaction groups based on the respective pre-execution read-write sets of the plurality of transactions received by the first consensus process from a second node in the blockchain system. (“In general, a consortium blockchain network is private among the participating entities. In a consortium blockchain network, the consensus process is controlled by an authorized set of nodes, referred to as consensus nodes, one or more of which are operated by a respective entity (a financial institution, insurance company, etc.).” (Para. 0086); “The primary consensus node is periodically changed. Transactions are added to the blockchain by all consensus nodes within the blockchain network reaching an agreement as to the world state of the blockchain network. In this process, messages are transmitted between consensus nodes, and each consensus nodes proves that a message is received from a specified peer node and verifies that the message was not modified during transmission.” (Para. 0098); See also Para. 0035-0036)
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US20210194672A1 (Narayanam), discussing “An example operation may include one or more of receiving blocks of a blockchain from one or more of a neighboring blockchain peer and an ordering service node, identifying two or more blocks from among the received blocks that belong to a same slot within the blockchain, validating the two or more identified blocks in parallel via execution of the two or more identified blocks at a same time, and in response to validation of the two or more identified blocks, storing the two or more identified blocks on a local blockchain ledger of a blockchain peer.” (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin A. Jimenez whose telephone number is (571) 270-3080. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W. Hayes can be reached on 571-272-6708. 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.
/Justin Jimenez/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights