IP Library Granted Patent US 9,858,551
Granted Patent B2
US 9,858,551 · App. 13/225,207 · Granted Jan 2, 2018

Ranking analysis results based on user perceived problems in a database system

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 9,858,551
App. No.
13/225,207
Granted
Jan 2, 2018
Kind
B2
Abstract

Methods and systems for ranking analysis results based on user perceived problems of a database system are described. During operation, an embodiment may receive a designation of a perceived database system performance problem from a user, wherein the problem is associated with one or more database system metrics. Next, the embodiment may determine a set of recommendations for alleviating the perceived database system performance problem. The embodiment may then analyze the set of recommendations to determine, for each recommendation in the set of recommendations, an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the one or more database system metrics. Finally, the embodiment may rank the set of recommendations according to the impact each recommendation is expected to have on the perceived database performance problem.

Claims (59)

1. A computer-implemented method for ranking analysis results based on user perceived problems of a database system, the method comprising:

receiving, from a user, an indication regarding a user-perceived database system performance problem, wherein the indication is associated with one or more database system metrics, and wherein the user-perceived database system performance problem is not determined based on whether or not a database system metric is within a target range of values;

analyzing the one or more database system metrics, wherein the analyzing is based on the user-perceived database system performance problem;

determining, by computer, a set of recommendations for alleviating the user-perceived database system performance problem at cost of degrading at least one of the one or more database system metrics that are not associated with the user-perceived database system performance problem;

analyzing the set of recommendations to determine, for each recommendation, an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem based on an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the one or more database system metrics; and

ranking the set of recommendations according to the impact each recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising performing a recommendation from the set of recommendations.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein performing the recommendation from the set of recommendations involves performing the recommendation with a highest ranking.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising providing the ranking of the set of recommendations to the user.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the database system metrics can include:

a memory utilization;

a CPU utilization;

a network bandwidth;

a network latency;

an I/O throughput;

an I/O latency; and

a query execution time.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein receiving the indication of the user-perceived database system performance problem from the user further involves receiving a target designation of one of:

an application;

a database server instance; or

a computer system that is executing the database server instance.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 6 , wherein ranking the set of recommendations for alleviating the user-perceived database system performance problem involves weighting the recommendations according to the target designation.

8. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform a method for ranking analysis results based on user perceived problems of a database system, the method comprising:

receiving, from a user, an indication a user-perceived database system performance problem, wherein the indication is associated with one or more database system metrics, and wherein the user-perceived database system performance problem is not determined based on whether or not a database system metric is within a target range of values;

analyzing the one or more database system metrics, wherein the analyzing is based on the user-perceived database system performance problem;

determining a set of recommendations for alleviating the user-perceived database system performance problem at =cost of degrading at least one of the one or more database system metrics that are not associated with the user-perceived database system performance problem;

analyzing the set of recommendations to determine, for each recommendation, an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem based on an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the one or more database system metrics; and

ranking the set of recommendations according to the impact each recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem.

9. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8 , wherein the method further comprises performing a recommendation from the set of recommendations.

10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9 , wherein performing the recommendation from the set of recommendations involves performing the recommendation with <, highest ranking.

11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8 , wherein the method further comprises providing the ranking of the set of recommendations to the user.

12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8 , wherein the database system metrics can include:

a memory utilization;

a CPU utilization;

a network bandwidth;

a network latency;

an I/O throughput;

an I/O latency; and

a query execution time.

13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8 , wherein receiving the indication of the user-perceived database system performance problem from the user further involves receiving a target designation of one of:

an application;

a database server instance; or

a computer system that is executing the database server instance.

14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13 , wherein ranking the set of recommendations for alleviating the user-perceived database system performance problem involves weighting the recommendations according to the target designation.

15. An apparatus configured for ranking analysis results based on user perceived problems of a database system, comprising:

a memory;

a processor;

a receiving mechanism configured to receive, from a user, an indication regarding a user-perceived database system performance problem, wherein the indication is associated with one or more database system metrics, and wherein the user-perceived database system performance problem is not determined based on whether or not a database system metric is within a target range of values;

analyzing the one or more database system metrics, wherein the analyzing is based on the user-perceived database system performance problem;

a determination mechanism configured to determine a set of recommendations for alleviating the user-perceived database system performance problem at a cost of degrading at least one of the one or more database system metrics that are not associated with the user-perceived database system performance problem;

an analysis mechanism configured to analyze the set of recommendations to determine, for each recommendation, an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem based on an impact the recommendation is expected to have on the one or more database system metrics; and

a ranking mechanism configured to rank the set of recommendations according to the impact each recommendation is expected to have on the user-perceived database system performance problem.

16. The apparatus of claim 15 , further comprising a tuning mechanism configured to perform a recommendation from the set of recommendations.

17. The apparatus of claim 16 , wherein the tuning mechanism is further configured to perform the recommendation with highest ranking.

18. The apparatus of claim 15 , further comprising a reporting mechanism configured to provide the ranking of the set of recommendations to the user.

19. The apparatus of claim 15 , wherein the receiving mechanism is further configured to receive a target designation of one of:

an application;

a database server instance; or

a computer system that is executing the database server instance.

Assignments (10)
NUNC PRO TUNC ASSIGNMENT Recorded Feb 20, 2024
From: IDERA, INC.
To: CORECO IDERA OPS, INC.
Reel/Frame 066496/0733 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Feb 20, 2024
From: CORECO IDERA OPS, INC.
To: IDERA, INC.
Reel/Frame 066626/0867 →
SECOND LIEN SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 14, 2015
From: IDERA, INC.; CODEGEAR LLC; EMBARCADERO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 036863/0137 →
FIRST LIEN SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 13, 2015
From: IDERA, INC.; CODEGEAR LLC; EMBARCADERO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.
To: JEFFERIES FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 036842/0410 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Oct 12, 2015
From: FIFTH STREET MANAGEMENT LLC
To: IDERA, INC.; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 036771/0552 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Oct 7, 2015
From: COMERICA BANK
To: IDERA, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.
Reel/Frame 036747/0982 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 25, 2014
From: IDERA, INC.; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION
To: FIFTH STREET MANAGEMENT LLC, AS AGENT
Reel/Frame 034260/0360 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Sep 8, 2014
From: IDERA, INC.; PRECISE SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.; COPPEREGG CORPORATION
To: COMERICA BANK, AS AGENT
Reel/Frame 033696/0004 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 28, 2014
From: BBS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
To: IDERA, INC.
Reel/Frame 032133/0613 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 21, 2011
From: BAILEY, GEORGE E., JR.; GOOLSBEE, KURT V.; MISKELLY, EVERETT T.
To: BBS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 026941/0831 →