IP Library Granted Patent US 8,285,841
Granted Patent B2
US 8,285,841 · App. 12/794,960 · Granted Oct 9, 2012

Service quality evaluator having adaptive evaluation criteria

View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 8,285,841
App. No.
12/794,960
Granted
Oct 9, 2012
Kind
B2
Abstract

An improved method is provided for evaluating service quality of a software application residing in a computing environment. The method includes: monitoring first and second metrics indicative of performance of the software application; evaluating the first metric in relation to a first evaluation criterion; evaluating the second metric in relation to a second evaluation criterion different than the first evaluation criterion; and determining the state of service for the software application based in part on the evaluation of the second metric. Over time, the second evaluation criterion is adapted based on the outcome of the evaluation of the first metric.

Claims (28)

1. A method for evaluating service quality of a software application residing in a computing environment, comprising:

executing a service quality evaluator on a computer processor;

determining, by the service quality evaluator, a first numeric value indicating a state of service for a system component by monitoring a metric associated with the system component and evaluating the metric associated with the system component in accordance with a first evaluation directive, where performance of the software application depends on the system component;

comparing, by the service quality evaluator, the first numeric value to a threshold;

determining, by the service quality evaluator, a second numeric value indicating a state of service for the software application by monitoring a metric associated with the software application and evaluating the metric associated with the software application in accordance with a second evaluation directive;

multiplying, by the service quality evaluator, the second numeric value by a first weighting factor when the first numeric value exceeds the threshold; and

multiplying, by the service quality evaluator, the second numeric value by a second weighting factor when the first numeric value is less than the threshold.

2. The method of claim 1 further comprises

determining a third numeric value indicating a state of service for the software application in accordance with a third evaluation directive;

multiplying the third numeric value by the second weighting factor when the first numeric value exceeds the threshold; and

multiplying the third numeric value by the first weighting factor when the first numeric value is less than the threshold.

3. The method of claim 2 further comprises aggregating the weighted second numeric value with the weighted third numeric value.

4. A method for evaluating service quality of a software application residing in a computing environment, comprising:

executing a service quality evaluator on a computer processor;

determining, by the service quality evaluator, a first numeric value indicating a state of service for a system component by monitoring a metric associated with the system component and evaluating the metric associated with the system component in accordance with a first evaluation directive, where performance of the software application depends on the system component;

determining, by the service quality evaluator, a second numeric value indicating a state of service for the software application by monitoring a metric associated with the software application and evaluating the metric associated with the software application in accordance with a second evaluation directive;

selecting, by the service quality evaluator, a value for a first weighting factor as a function of the first numeric value;

weighting, by the service quality evaluator, the second numeric value by the first weighting factor;

determining, by the service quality evaluator, a third numeric value indicating a state of service for the software application by monitoring a metric associated with the software application and evaluating the metric associated with the software application in accordance with a third evaluation directive;

selecting, by the service quality evaluator, a value for a second weighting factor as a function of the first numeric value;

weighting, by the service quality evaluator, the third numeric value by the second weighting factor; and

assigning a state of service for the software application by aggregating the weighted second numeric value with the weighted third numeric value.

5. The method of claim 4 further comprises

comparing, by the service quality evaluator, the first numeric value to a threshold; and

assigning a value to the first and second weighting factors based on the comparison.

6. The method of claim 5 further comprises changing the value assigned to at least one of the first and second weighting factors in accordance with changes in the first numeric value.

7. The method of claim 4 wherein determining the second numeric value further includes monitoring multiple metrics indicative of the performance of the software application and evaluating each of the metrics in relation to a different evaluation criterion.

8. The method of claim 4 wherein assigning a state of service for the software application further comprises computing a weighted average.

Assignments (11)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Dec 16, 2022
From: DYNATRACE LLC
To: BMO HARRIS BANK N.A.
Reel/Frame 062142/0187 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST IN PATENTS AT R/F 046923/0557 Recorded Dec 5, 2022
From: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: DYNATRACE, LLC
Reel/Frame 062056/0562 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST IN PATENT COLLATERAL RECORDED AT R/F 46923/0528 Recorded Aug 6, 2019
From: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC, COLLATERAL AGENT
To: DYNATRACE LLC
Reel/Frame 049966/0518 →
SECOND LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 24, 2018
From: DYNATRACE LLC
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC
Reel/Frame 046923/0528 →
FIRST LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 24, 2018
From: DYNATRACE LLC
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC
Reel/Frame 046923/0557 →
RELEASE OF FIRST LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT RECORDED AT REEL\FRAME 035200\0973 AND 035200\0955 Recorded Aug 23, 2018
From: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC
To: DYNATRACE LLC; COMPUWARE CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 046922/0886 →
TERMINATION OF SECURITY INTEREST IN PATENTS AT REEL/FRAME NO. 035201/0065 Recorded Feb 14, 2018
From: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: COMPUWARE CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 045325/0384 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Apr 27, 2015
From: COMPUWARE CORPORATION
To: DYNATRACE LLC
Reel/Frame 035497/0546 →
FIRST LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Mar 13, 2015
From: COMPUWARE CORPORATION
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE, LLC
Reel/Frame 035200/0973 →
SECOND LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Mar 13, 2015
From: COMPUWARE CORPORATION
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE, LLC
Reel/Frame 035201/0065 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 7, 2010
From: OOSTLANDER, BART; DUNN, BRYCE
To: COMPUWARE CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 024494/0099 →