The present invention is generally directed toward the field of stream processing, particularly the use of stream processing in a system such as a business rules engine, an event stream processor, and a complex event stream processor.
The following paragraphs provide several definitions for various terms used herein. These paragraphs also provide background information relating to these terms.
GPP: As used herein, the term “general-purpose processor” (or GPP) refers to a hardware device having a fixed form and whose functionality is variable, wherein this variable functionality is defined by fetching instructions and executing those instructions (for example, an Intel Xeon processor or an AMD Opteron processor), of which a conventional central processing unit (CPU) is a common example.
Reconfigurable Logic: As used herein, the term “reconfigurable logic” refers to any logic technology whose form and function can be significantly altered (i.e., reconfigured) in the field post-manufacture. This is to be contrasted with a GPP, whose function can change post-manufacture, but whose form is fixed at manufacture.
Software: As used herein, the term “software” refers to data processing functionality that is deployed on a GPP or other processing devices, wherein software cannot be used to change or define the form of the device on which it is loaded.
Firmware: As used herein, the term “firmware” refers to data processing functionality that is deployed on reconfigurable logic or other processing devices, wherein firmware may be used to change or define the form of the device on which it is loaded.
Coprocessor: As used herein, the term “coprocessor” refers to a computational engine designed to operate in conjunction with other components in a computational system having a main processor (wherein the main processor itself may comprise multiple processors such as in a multi-core processor architecture). Typically, a coprocessor is optimized to perform a specific set of tasks and is used to offload tasks from a main processor (which is typically a GPP) in order to optimize system performance. The scope of tasks performed by a coprocessor may be fixed or variable, depending on the architecture of the coprocessor. Examples of fixed coprocessor architectures include Graphics Processor Units which perform a broad spectrum of tasks and floating point numeric coprocessors which perform a relatively narrow set of tasks. Examples of reconfigurable coprocessor architectures include reconfigurable logic devices such as Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) which may be reconfigured to implement a wide variety of fixed or programmable computational engines. The functionality of a coprocessor may be defined via software and/or firmware.
Hardware Acceleration: As used herein, the term “hardware acceleration” refers to the use of software and/or firmware implemented on a coprocessor for offloading one or more processing tasks from a main processor to decrease processing latency for those tasks relative to the main processor.
Enterprise: As used herein, the term “enterprise” refers to any business organization or governmental entity that stores and/or processes data (referred to as “enterprise data”) as part of its ongoing operations.
Database: As used herein, the term “database” refers to a persistent data store with indexing capabilities to expedite query processing. Various database management system (DBMS) implementations might be categorized as relational (RDBMS), object-oriented (OODBMS), hierarchical, etc.; however, the dominant architecture in today's industry is a relational, row-column, structured query language (SQL)-capable database. An ANSI-standard SQL database engine is a mature software architecture that can retrieve structured data in response to a query, usually in an efficient manner.
Structured Data: As used herein, the term “structured data” refers to data that has been normalized and persisted to a relational database. Normalization is the data design process of putting data into a tabular, row-column format and abstracting duplicate data into separate tables. Structured data in relational columns is capable of being indexed with B-tree indexes, significantly speeding access to the data in these columns. In SQL terms, structured columns have size limits. These columns may have constraints and referential integrity applied to them in order to ensure consistent data quality.
Examples of common structured SQL datatypes are: INT(eger), NUMBER, CHAR(acter), VARCHAR, DATE, TIMESTAMP.
Unstructured Data: As used herein, the term “unstructured data” refers to data that falls outside the scope of the definition above for structured data. Thus, the term unstructured data encompasses files, documents or objects with free form text or embedded values included therein. This data includes the complete set of bytes, often including binary-format data, that was used by the application that generated it. Examples of unstructured data include word processing documents (e.g., Microsoft Word documents in their native format), Adobe Acrobat documents, emails, image files, video files, audio files, and other files in their native formats relative to the software application that created them. In SQL terms, unstructured columns have very large, if not unlimited size. Common examples of unstructured SQL datatypes are: BLOB, TEXT, XML, RAW, and IMAGE. Unstructured objects may also be stored outside the database, for example in operating system files. Access to these external objects from within the database engine uses links in the metadata in the database table to the storage location.
There are a number of reasons why XML will not normally be categorized as “structured” as that term is used herein:
Although the concept of “semi-structured” data with flexible schemas is emerging, particularly for XML, for present purposes everything that has not been normalized and persisted to a relational database will be considered unstructured data. As such, a column that is of the XML datatype would thus fall under this present definition of “unstructured data”.
Bus: As used herein, the term “bus” refers to a logical bus which encompasses any physical interconnect for which devices and locations are accessed by an address. Examples of buses that could be used in the practice of the present invention include, but are not limited to the PCI family of buses (e.g., PCI-X and PCI-Express) and HyperTransport buses.
Pipelining: As used herein, the terms “pipeline”, “pipelined sequence”, or “chain” refer to an arrangement of application modules wherein the output of one application module is connected to the input of the next application module in the sequence. This pipelining arrangement allows each application module to independently operate on any data it receives during a given clock cycle and then pass its output to the next downstream application module in the sequence during another clock cycle.
Enterprises such as corporations, institutions, agencies, and other entities have massive amounts of data for which analysis is needed to enable decision making processes, and computerized systems based on business rules have arisen to aid enterprises' decision-making capabilities in this regard.
A variety of systems have been developed to provide rule-based decision-making capabilities to enterprises. Examples of these systems include event processors, complex event processors (CEPs), and business rules engines. An event processor and a complex event processor can be distinguished from a business rules engine in that an event processor and a complex event processor are “feed forward” systems in that they do not feed result information from the business rule condition checking process back into the event processor or complex event processor to determine further actions that need to be taken. In contrast, a business rules engine employs some form of inferencing intelligence at the output of the business rule condition checking process to feed all or a select subset of the results back into the business rules engine to determine further actions that need to be taken. A complex event processor can be distinguished from an event processor in that a complex event processor can take into consideration multiple events when deciding whether a particular business rule condition has been satisfied.
An algorithm that has arisen to implement a rule-based system exemplified by
The inventors believe that conventional implementations of computerized rule-based systems do not perform exceptionally well, particularly in instances where the size of the rule set is large and growing, where the size of the data volume is large and growing, and/or where there is a need for low latency with respect to making a business rule-based decision after first receiving the pertinent data. For example, the inventors believe that conventional business rule processing systems which rely on analyzing data stored using database technology such as a conventional RDBMS (which are optimized for large-scale permanent storage and carefully-tuned query performance) have difficulty keeping up with the demands of very high speed data streams and thus serve as a potential bottleneck in a rule-based decision-making system. Thus, as enterprises' rule sets and data volumes continue to grow in size and complexity and as data transfer speeds continue to increase, the inventors further believe that time will exacerbate this problem unless a better solution for business rule processing is devised.
In an effort to address this need in the art, the inventors herein disclose a technique for hardware-accelerating the process of determining whether data within a data stream satisfies at least one rule condition of a rule. The data streams, as represented by a stream of bits, may include structured and/or unstructured data. Based on such a hardware-acceleration rule condition check operation, a rule condition check result is generated to indicate whether a data stream portion (such as a record or field) satisfies any rule conditions. Preferably, the rule condition check result is generated only when a data stream portion satisfies a rule condition. However, this need not be the case. It should also be understood that the rule condition check result can be expressed in any of a number of ways. For example, a rule condition check result can be expressed as a bit value (or bit values) in a register within a system. A rule condition check result can also be expressed as one or more bits that are added to an existing record (such as by adding a field to a record to express the rule condition check result or by adding a bit to an existing field of a record to express the rule condition check result). As yet another example, a rule condition check result can be expressed as a new record that is inserted into the data stream.
Based on the rule condition check results, enterprises can take desired actions with an extremely low degree of latency, particularly relative to a conventional rule-based decision-making system which relies on software executed by a main GPP for the system to determine whether various data records satisfy pre-defined rule conditions. With embodiments described herein, data is streamed into a coprocessor, and rule condition check results based on a plurality of different rule conditions can be generated at bus bandwidth rates, thereby leading to dramatic improvements in rule-based decision-making latency.
In doing so, the present invention preferably harnesses the underlying hardware-accelerated technology disclosed in the following patents and patent applications: U.S. Pat. No. 6,711,558 entitled “Associated Database Scanning and Information Retrieval”, U.S. Pat. No. 7,139,743 entitled “Associative Database Scanning and Information Retrieval using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0294059 entitled “Intelligent Data Storage and Processing Using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0067108 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Performing Biosequence Similarity Searching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0086274 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Protein Sequence Alignment Using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0130140 entitled “Method and Device for High Performance Regular Expression Pattern Matching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0260602 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Approximate Pattern Matching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0174841 entitled “Firmware Socket Module for FPGA-Based Pipeline Processing”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0237327 entitled “Method and System for High Throughput Blockwise Independent Encryption/Decryption”), U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0294157 entitled “Method and System for High Speed Options Pricing”, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/765,306, filed Jun. 19, 2007, entitled “High Speed Processing of Financial Information Using FPGA Devices” (and published as U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0243675), U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/938,732, filed Nov. 12, 2007, entitled “Method and System for High Performance Data Metatagging and Data Indexing Using Coprocessors” (published as U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0114725), U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/938,709, filed Nov. 12, 2007, entitled “Method and System for High Performance Integration, Processing and Searching of Structured and Unstructured Data Using Coprocessors” (published as U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0114724), and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/013,302, filed Jan. 11, 2008, entitled “Method and System for Low Latency Basket Calculation” (published as U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0182683), the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
It should be understood that the range of actions which can triggered by the accelerated rule condition check operations described herein are virtually limitless and can be tailored to meet the particular needs of a practitioner of embodiments for the invention. Exemplary actions may include sending an alert to a designated person or group of persons, invoking a particular process within an enterprise computing system, deleting a record, placing a record into a holding queue, routing a record to a particular destination, etc. Furthermore, with respect to the conceptual “event/condition/action” (ECA) framework discussed in connection with
The data streams being operated upon by the embodiments of the present invention preferably comprise a plurality of records or events as represented by bit strings. It should be noted that the terms records and events are used interchangeably herein. A data record or event signifies a fact 100 such as that described in connection with
Many enterprises have one or more data feeds where extremely high volumes of data events are constantly streaming into the enterprise's computing system. To provide an enterprise with actionable intelligence capabilities with respect to such data streams, the inventors disclose various embodiments which accelerate the operations needed to determine which incoming events satisfy which pre-defined rules. Examples of operations which can be hardware-accelerated in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention include rule condition check operations (such as matching operations, range check operations, and threshold check operations), aggregate value computation operations, derived value computation operations, filtering operations, path merging operations, and formatting operations. It should be noted that the rule condition check operations can be performed directly on data values within the events themselves or on data values derived and/or aggregated from data values within the events themselves.
Preferably a pipeline is arranged in a coprocessor to check the incoming data streams against the rule conditions of the enterprise's business rules. Even more preferably, such a pipeline includes a plurality of different parallel paths for performing different ones of these checks simultaneously with one another.
Further still, the accelerated operations described herein are preferably deployed by an enterprise in systems such as event stream processors, complex event stream processors, and business rules engines.
Examples of the myriad of beneficial business rule-based applications for embodiments of the invention include data quality checking (particularly in data integration systems such as Extract, Transfer, Load (ETL) systems), security monitoring for transactions such as credit card transactions, financial market monitoring, data routing within an enterprise based on data content, Rete network acceleration, and others, as explained in greater detail below.
These and other features and advantages of the present invention will be apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art upon review of the following description and drawings.
Preferably, appliance 200 employs a hardware-accelerated data processing capability through coprocessor 450 to analyze an incoming data stream against a set of business rules. Within appliance 200, a coprocessor 450 is positioned to receive data that streams into the appliance 200 from a network 420 (via network interface 410). Network 420 preferably comprises an enterprise network (whether LAN or WAN), in which various disparate data sources are located. It should be understood that the data streaming into the appliance 200 through enterprise network 420 can be data that is received by network 420 from external sources such as the Internet or other communication networks. Such incoming data may comprise both structured and unstructured data as appliance 200 can provide beneficial business rules analysis for both.
The computer system defined by processor 412 and RAM 408 can be any commodity computer system as would be understood by those having ordinary skill in the art. For example, the computer system may be an Intel Xeon system or an AMD Opteron system. Thus, processor 412, which serves as the central or main processor for appliance 200, preferably comprises a GPP.
In a preferred embodiment, the coprocessor 450 comprises a reconfigurable logic device 402. Preferably, data streams into the reconfigurable logic device 402 by way of system bus 406, although other design architectures are possible (see
The reconfigurable logic device 402 has firmware modules deployed thereon that define its functionality. The firmware socket module 404 handles the data movement requirements (both command data and target data) into and out of the reconfigurable logic device, thereby providing a consistent application interface to the firmware application module (FAM) chain 350 that is also deployed on the reconfigurable logic device. The FAMs 350i of the FAM chain 350 are configured to perform specified data processing operations on any data that streams through the chain 350 from the firmware socket module 404. Preferred examples of FAMs that can be deployed on reconfigurable logic in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention are described below.
The specific data processing operation that is performed by a FAM is controlled/parameterized by the command data that FAM receives from the firmware socket module 404. This command data can be FAM-specific, and upon receipt of the command, the FAM will arrange itself to carry out the data processing operation controlled by the received command. For example, within a FAM that is configured to perform an exact match operation, the FAM's exact match operation can be parameterized to define the key(s) that the exact match operation will be run against. In this way, a FAM that is configured to perform an exact match operation can be readily re-arranged to perform a different exact match operation by simply loading new parameters for one or more different keys in that FAM.
Once a FAM has been arranged to perform the data processing operation specified by a received command, that FAM is ready to carry out its specified data processing operation on the data stream that it receives from the firmware socket module. Thus, a FAM can be arranged through an appropriate command to process a specified stream of data in a specified manner. Once the FAM has completed its data processing operation, another command can be sent to that FAM that will cause the FAM to re-arrange itself to alter the nature of the data processing operation performed thereby. Not only will the FAM operate at hardware speeds (thereby providing a high throughput of data through the FAM), but the FAMs can also be flexibly reprogrammed to change the parameters of their data processing operations.
The FAM chain 350 preferably comprises a plurality of firmware application modules (FAMs) 350a, 350b, . . . that are arranged in a pipelined sequence. However, it should be noted that within the firmware pipeline, one or more parallel paths of FAMs 350i can be employed. For example, the firmware chain may comprise three FAMs arranged in a first pipelined path (e.g., FAMs 350a, 350b, 350c) and four FAMs arranged in a second pipelined path (e.g., FAMs 350d, 350e, 350f, and 350g), wherein the first and second pipelined paths are parallel with each other. Furthermore, the firmware pipeline can have one or more paths branch off from an existing pipeline path. A practitioner of the present invention can design an appropriate arrangement of FAMs for FAM chain 350 based on the processing needs of a given application.
A communication path 430 connects the firmware socket module 404 with the input of the first one of the pipelined FAMs 350a. The input of the first FAM 350a serves as the entry point into the FAM chain 350. A communication path 432 connects the output of the final one of the pipelined FAMs 350m with the firmware socket module 404. The output of the final FAM 350m serves as the exit point from the FAM chain 350. Both communication path 430 and communication path 432 are preferably multi-bit paths.
The nature of the software and hardware/software interfaces used by appliance 200, particularly in connection with data flow into and out of the firmware socket module are described in greater detail in the above-referenced and incorporated U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0174841.
It is worth noting that in either the configuration of
In the example of
Any of a number of matching techniques can be used to perform the matching operation of matching module 602. For example, hardware-accelerated matching techniques can be used such as those described in the above-referenced and incorporated U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,711,558 and 7,139,743 and U.S. Patent Application Publications 2006/0294059, 2007/0130140, and 2007/0260602. The 2007/0130140 publication describes a technique whereby a data stream can be inspected at hardware speeds to assess whether any data serves as a match to any of a number of regular expression patterns. As such, the technology disclosed in the 2007/0130140 publication can preferably be used by matching module 602 to detect any matches to rule conditions 606 which are expressed as regular expression patterns. Also, the 2007/0260602 publication discloses a technique whereby a data stream can be inspected at hardware speeds to query a given window of the data stream against a large number of standing keys (of various lengths) to determine whether the data stream window is an approximate match (within a definable degree of tolerance) to any of the keys. It should be understood that the technology of the 2007/0260602 publication can also be used to support exact match operations by simply setting the tolerance degree to a value of zero. As such, the technology disclosed in the 2007/0260602 publication can be used by matching module 602 to detect any exact or approximate matches with respect to rule conditions 606 which are expressed as words. Additional examples of hardware-accelerated matching techniques which can be used by matching module 602 include the exact matching technique known as the Rabin-Karp Search (RKS) (see Brodie, Benjamin C., Roger D. Chamberlain, Berkley Shands, and Jason White, “Dynamic reconfigurable computing,” in Proc. Of 9th Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices International Conference, September 2006, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference) and the approximate matching technique known as the k-sub matching algorithm (see the above-referenced and incorporated article Brodie, Benjamin C., Roger D. Chamberlain, Berkley Shands, and Jason White, “Dynamic reconfigurable computing,” in Proc. Of 9th Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices International Conference, September 2006).
The enriched event stream 608 produced by coprocessor 450 can optionally then be passed along to downstream processing entities which are configured to take additional actions in response to the detected rule condition matches. As noted above, such an action engine 502 can be implemented in either hardware and/or software deployed on the coprocessor 450, a main processor for the system, and/or other processing device. However, it should be understood that the coprocessor 450 of
The hardware-accelerated rules-based decision-making system of
It should also be understood that the coprocessor 450 in a rules-based decision-making system may optionally employ modules in addition to or different than matching module 602.
It should also be noted that pipeline 710 may optionally employ a plurality of parallel paths, as shown in
In many instances, it will be desirable for the pipeline 710 to possess the capability to perform complex event stream processing. With complex event stream processing, the question of whether a rule is satisfied may require rule conditions which depend upon multiple events or events within different streams. As such, it is beneficial for coprocessor 450 to possess the ability to cache a desired window of received events and rule condition check results. In this manner, determinations can be made as to whether a rule condition whose satisfaction requires consideration of multiple events. To provide such caching capabilities, pipeline 710 employs a windowing module 720, as shown in
It may also be desirable for pipeline 710 to include a join/correlation module 730, as shown in
Optionally, the join/correlation module 730 may employ additional features such as a join to static data from a database. With a join to static data, the data to be joined would be read from a static database such as external database 734. In this way, a join operation can operate to add data which is stored in the database to the streaming records. An example of a join to static data that can be performed by pipeline 710 involves joining a stream of transaction records with data from a customer master table that is stored in a database 734. Using a join key such a name field in the stream of transaction records and a name field in the customer master table, joins can be performed on transaction records and customer data from the table that share the same value in a name field.
Another feature that can be performed by a join/correlation module is an approximate join. Continuing with the example above, an approximate join between a stream of transaction records and data from a customer master table, wherein the approximate join is based on a join key that is a name field, will support joins where there is only an approximate match and not an exact match between the values in the name fields of the transaction records and the customer table. Thus, a transaction record with a name field value of “John A. Smith” can be joined with customer data associated with a name field value of “John Smith” even through the two field values do not exactly match. As such, the join/correlation module 730 would employ approximate matching functionality that performs an approximate match operation between the values in the fields defined by the join key that are under consideration for a possible join. If the approximate match operation results in a determination that the two values are sufficiently similar, then the join is performed. Approximate matching technology such as the kinds previously discussed can be used for this functionality. It should also be understood that approximate joins need not be limited to joins on data stored in a database 734. Approximate joins can also be performed on multiple streams available to module 730. Furthermore, the approximate nature of the approximate join need not only be defined by approximate word matching operations. For example, with approximate joins on multiple data streams, it should be noted that because the time dimension of the multiple streams may not exactly align with each other, the value matching of the approximate join may be based on time intervals rather than exact times. Thus, if a time stamp field of records within two streams is used as a join key, then an approximate join operation can be configured such that any time stamp value within a range of time stamp values for the two streams will be deemed a match. To implement this functionality, a range check operation such as the ones described herein can be performed.
Pipeline 710 may also be configured to include an aggregation module 740, as shown in
In instances where the event stream 600 does not possess a record/field format for its data (or possesses a record/field format that is not recognized by pipeline 710), pipeline 710 may also employ a record and field identifier module 750 at its head, as shown in
It should also be understood that the arrangements for pipeline 710 shown in
Field and record splitter 1006 operates to parse the raw data stream 600 to identify where record delimiters and field delimiters from tables 1002 and 1004 should be inserted. Splitter 1006 is preferably provided with (offset, length) pairs which indicate where the different fields exist relative to the start of each record. Upon encountering a location where an FDL needs to be inserted, the splitter 1006 can access table 1002 to retrieve the appropriate FDL and insert that FDL into the record at that location. In this manner, the field and record splitter 1006 is able to produce an output stream 752 of data events that are partitioned into records and fields.
It should be understood that the field selection module 902 in each path of pipeline 900 can be configured to pass different fields based on the rule conditions within each path's rule set. That is, if incoming event stream 752 includes records partitioned into multiple fields, where one field is relevant to a rule condition within the first path's rule set but not any rule condition in the second path's rule set, then the field selection module 902 for the first path would be configured to pass that field while the field selection module 902 for the second path would be configured to block that field. In this manner, the field selection module 902 serves to lower the processing workload of downstream modules in each path.
It should be noted that module 904 is preferably only configured to output a match if any field within stream 1106 contains a data pattern which matches a regular expression pattern key. However, a given rule condition may require that the regular expression pattern key appear in a particular field of data. Thus, consider an example where a rule condition requires that regular expression A be present within field 3 of a record and where another rule condition requires that regular expression B be present within field 5 of a record. If a record with regular expression B within field 3 and regular expression A within field 5 is received by module 902, then module 902 will output two matches. However, to assess whether these two matches actually satisfy the rule conditions, a secondary check is needed to find if the match occurred for a valid field-regular expression combination. To accomplish this purpose, pipeline 900 employs secondary matching module 906.
An exemplary embodiment for a secondary matching module 906 is shown in
It should be noted that each field indexed by table 1302 may have multiple associated regular expression pattern identifiers. In such instances, it should also be noted that table 1302 can be alternatively configured such that the regular expression identifiers are used to index table entries, with the table entries being populated by field delimiters and rule condition identifiers.
The second path of pipeline 900 preferably includes a word separator module 908 downstream from that path's field selection module 902. An example of such a word separator module 908 is depicted in
While record join module 9141 receives input streams from the two rule condition checking paths of pipeline 900, record join module 9142 will receive as input streams the merged stream output by module 9141 and the original partitioned event stream 752 produced by module 750 (by way of bypass path 810). Thus, the record merge logic 1704 of module 9142 will operate to merge the enhanced records into the original partitioned event stream 752.
The enhanced records within 608 can then be streamed out of coprocessor 450 and returned to software running on the host system (e.g., software running on processor 412) or elsewhere within an enterprise computing system where post-processing in an action engine based on the enhancements can occur (if necessary) and the records can be inserted into an appropriately selected location in a relational database, saved to file, etc. within the enterprise computing system. It should also be noted that the stream 608 can be passed to additional modules within coprocessor 450 for post processing if desired.
It should be noted that pipeline 900 is also only exemplary in nature as different arrangements of paths and modules can be configured to meet a particular rule set. For example, it may be desirable to also employ a secondary matching module 906 in the exact/approximate word matching path.
It may also be desirable to process event streams against rule conditions that require consideration of multiple events, a process known as complex event processing (CEP).
Thus, as an enhanced record 1908 is received by the complex event generator 1902, a lookup 1916 can be performed in the table using the rule condition identifier 1330 in record 1908 to retrieve the running aggregate value x and alarm threshold y for that rule condition identifier (see retrievals 1920 and 1928 in
It should be understood that such aggregation processing could also be performed within a pipeline such as pipeline 900 if an appropriate aggregation module is located downstream from a matching module. It should also be understood that the aggregation processing shown by
Appliance 200 can thus be used to generate rule condition check results (and optionally additional secondary actions) for the incoming data stream as that data reaches the enterprise and before it lands in data storage somewhere within enterprise network 420. The data processed by appliance 200 can also include data originating from within the enterprise computing system 2004. Furthermore, appliance 200 can optionally be configured to output its generated rule condition results for delivery (or make its generated rule condition results available) to other processing entities within enterprise network 420 where rule-based post-processing can occur (such as taking one or more actions based on which rule conditions are shown to be satisfied within the enhanced stream produced by appliance 200). Further still, one or more terminals within enterprise network 420 can be configured to interface with appliance 200 to define the rule conditions and modules to be deployed in appliance 200.
Accelerated stream processing in accordance with the embodiments of the present invention provides a myriad of beneficial uses. For example, one area where the inventors believe that a great need exists for low latency event stream processing is data quality checking and data integration.
The first path of pipeline 2100 is configured to perform a range check operation on data fields within stream 2102 for which a rule exists that requires the data value for those fields to fall within specified ranges. Thus, field selection module 9021 is preferably configured to only pass fields within stream which have range constraints. Downstream from module 9021 is a range check module 2104. If range check module 2104 detects that a particular field's data value is outside of the range specified for that field by a rule condition, then range check module 2104 preferably produces a rule condition check result indicative of this error condition. In this way, the record with the invalid data range can be passed to an exception handling routine before being loaded into storage such as a database or the like.
The second path of pipeline 2100 is configured to perform a character check on those data fields within stream 2102 for which the characters must fall within a particular character set (e.g., the characters must be a number, must be a letter, must be a member of the ASCII character set, etc.). Thus, field selection module 9022 is preferably configured to only pass fields within stream which have a particular character set constraint. Downstream from module 9022 is a character parsing module 2106. Character parsing module 2106 operates to separate the characters within the select data fields. Character parsing module 2106 preferably operates in the manner of word parsing module 908 albeit for characters rather than words. Thereafter, character check module 2108 operates to determine if any character within the select field is not a member of the defined character set for that field. If module 2108 detects that a particular character value is not a member of a character set for that field as defined by a rule condition, then module 2108 preferably produces a rule condition check result indicative of this error condition. In this way, the record with the invalid character can be passed to an exception handling routine before being loaded into storage such as a database or the like. Module 2108 preferably operates using an exact matching module such as one based on the technology described above in connection with matching module 602.
The third path of pipeline 2100 is configured to perform a value check on those data fields within stream 2102 for which the value must be a member of a limited set of possible values (e.g., a “color” field which must take one value that is a member of the set {red, blue, green, white, black}). Thus, field selection module 9023 is preferably configured to only pass fields within stream which have a particular member set constraint (e.g., only the “color” fields of records within stream 2102 are passed by module 9023). Downstream from module 9023 is an exact word matching module 2110 that is keyed with the members of the pertinent member set (e.g., the keys are {red, blue, green, white, black}). If word matching module 2110 determines that the field value is not a member of the member set defined by the rule condition, then module 2110 preferably produces a rule condition check result indicative of this error condition. In this way, the record with the invalid field value can be passed to an exception handling routine before being loaded into storage such as a database or the like. Module 2110 preferably operates using an exact matching module such as one based on the technology described above in connection with matching module 602.
It should be noted that modules 2104, 2108, and/or 2110 can also be configured to generate one or more new events to indicate these error conditions rather than augmenting each of the affected records themselves.
Pipeline 2100 can be advantageously used in a data integration system such as an extract, transfer, load (ETL) system to provide an efficient means for ensuring that only quality data gets loaded into an enterprise's database(s). It should be understood that other data quality checking operations can be performed by a pipeline such as pipeline 2100 in a data integration system. For example, an additional data quality checking operation can be performed to identify whether data within select fields are properly formatted (e.g., ensuring that a bit length for a select field satisfies a rule condition, ensuring that a data value for a select field is right or left justified as required by a rule condition, etc.).
Another area where the inventors believe that a great need exists for low latency event stream processing with respect to business rules is the processing of high volumes of transactions such as credit card transactions.
The first path of pipeline 2200 is configured to check each transaction record for a valid credit card number. Thus, field selection module 9021 is preferably configured to pass only the credit card number field of each record. An exact word matching module 2204 is configured with the set of valid credit card numbers as keys. Thus, if the credit card number within the credit card number field of a record within stream 2202 is valid, then module 2204 will find a hit on one of its stored keys. If a hit is not found on one of the stored keys, then one or more bits can be added to the pertinent record to indicate the error condition. Based on this error condition, an enterprise can be timely informed of the attempted use of an invalid credit card number and can decline authorization for the transaction.
The second path of pipeline 2200 is configured to provide security based on a range check for the purchase amounts in credit card transaction records. In many instances of credit card fraud, the perpetrator will attempt to test the validity of a stolen card number by first seeing if he/she can obtain a approval for a very small transaction with the stolen card number. If approved, the perpetrator later attempts a much larger purchase. Another risk posed with respect to credit card fraud is where the perpetrator attempts to purchase extremely expensive items with the stolen card number. While a large purchase amount itself may not necessarily indicate a credit card number is being fraudulently used, a cardholder or credit card company may nevertheless want to be timely informed when large purchases are made. To provide low latency warnings regarding such low value and high value credit card transactions, the second path of pipeline 2200 employs a range check module 2206 that operates in a manner similar to that described in connection with
The alarm limits present in table 2220 can be defined for each credit card number by a credit card company based on their knowledge in the industry or even defined by credit card holders themselves. Appropriate command instructions (received by pipeline 2200 by way of firmware socket module 404) can be used to populate table 2220 with appropriate values. It should be noted that a credit card company may optionally choose to use the same alarm limits for all credit card numbers, in which case the credit card number-based lookup into table 2220 would not be needed, and field selection module 9022 can be configured to also strip out the credit card number field from each record. It should also be noted that an indirection table can be used by module 2206 to indirectly map each credit card number to entries in table 2220, thereby allowing the entries in table 2220 to be indexed in consecutive addresses. Such an indirection table could be particularly useful if a credit card company chose to associate alarm limits with sets of credit card numbers rather than each credit card number individually. It should further be noted that modules 2204, 2206, and/or 2208 can also be configured to generate one or more new events to indicate these security risk conditions rather than augmenting each of the affected records themselves.
The third path of pipeline 2200 is configured to provide security based on rule condition checks for various derived values generated from the credit card transaction records. Module 2208 can be configured to compute any of a number of derived values that may be relevant to security issues. For example, an unusually large purchase amount may be a cause for alarm. However, statistical processing is needed to keep track of values such as the historic average purchase amount for a credit card number and the current month's average purchase amount for a credit card number and to make decisions as to what qualifies as unusual purchasing activity. Another indicator for a security risk would be a sudden surge in the number of transactions over periods such as months, days, etc. To be timely warned of such potentially problematic situations, low latency aggregation and derived value computations are needed within pipeline 2200. A derived value check module 2208 can provide such functionality.
As shown in
As shown in
It should be noted that the types of operations performed by module 2208 with respect to
Appropriate command instructions (received by pipeline 2200 by way of firmware socket module 404) can be used to populate table 2400 with appropriate values for values such as threshold 2416. It should be noted that an indirection table can be used by module 2208 to indirectly map each credit card number to entries in table 2400, thereby allowing the entries in table 2400 to be indexed in consecutive addresses.
Another area where the inventors believe that low latency event stream processing can provide significant advantages is with respect to the routing and secure storage of information such as social security numbers and credit card numbers within an enterprise. In many instances, an enterprise may choose (or may be required by law) to handle sensitive personal information in a more secure manner than other forms of enterprise data. Examples of such information which warrants specialized handling include social security numbers and credit card numbers. Such data may need to be specially encrypted and/or stored in particular databases. To comply with such requirements, it is desirable for an event stream processing appliance 200 to implement business rules which identify those incoming data events which contain such specialized information and then ensure that those data events are properly handled and routed within the enterprise computing system. Thus, a coprocessor within appliance 200 can employ a regular expression pattern matching module to detect which incoming data events contain patterns indicative of a social security number (e.g., nnn-nn-nnnn), a credit card number (e.g., nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn), and the like. Upon detection of such patterns in the incoming data events, those data events can be flagged with rule condition check results for special handling, which may include encryption and/or storage in particular databases. Based on such enhancements within the data events, other components within enterprise computing system can ensure that the sensitive data events are routed to appropriate handling routines.
Yet another area where the inventors believe that low latency event stream processing can provide significant advantages is enterprise protection of trade secrets. In such an instance, an enterprise may wish to employ appliance 200 of
Additional areas where the inventors believe that low latency event stream processing based on business rules would be helpful include the acceleration of XML payloads, streaming SQL, the processing of financial market feeds to provide functions such as financial risk management, processing high volume transactional data other than credit card transactions (e.g., general sales transactions, telephone call records, etc.), security incident monitoring and prevention, the collecting of auditing data for compliance monitoring, applications needing low latency aggregation and statistical computations, monitoring sensor data streams (e.g., RFID), the monitoring of pharmaceutical sales records to detect potential “hot spots” where an epidemic may be breaking out, and the monitoring of sales transactions to identify where inventories need to be quickly replenished.
Another beneficial application for low latency event stream processing is the acceleration of a Rete network.
Alpha nodes 2504 receive an incoming fact stream and test these facts individually against the different rule conditions of the rules. The hardware-accelerated rule condition check operations described herein can be used by alpha nodes 2504 for this purpose (such as the matching operations, range check operations, threshold check operations, etc. as described above). Preferably, the alpha nodes 2504 are configured to perform these rule condition check operations for the different conditions on each fact in parallel with one another. Any facts which satisfy C1 are stored in alpha memory 2506. Any facts which satisfy C2 are stored in alpha memory 2508. Any facts which satisfy C3 are stored in alpha memory 2510. Any facts which satisfy C4 are stored in alpha memory 2512, and any facts which satisfy C5 are stored in alpha memory 2514. Preferably, these alpha memories are deployed in available memory space of the coprocessor 450. Furthermore, preferably the alpha nodes 2504 are deployed as firmware application modules in a processing pipeline of coprocessor 450.
Beta nodes within the Rete network then operate to check for whether any of the facts in the alpha memories satisfy the joinder of different rule conditions required by the rule set. Preferably, the beta nodes are also deployed on the coprocessor 450. Beta node 2518 reads facts out of alpha memory 2506 and compares those records with dummy data within a dummy top node to store any matching facts in beta memory 2520 corresponding to C1. Given that this is the topmost beta node in the network 2500, all facts within memory 2506 will be written to memory 2520. Thus, the Rete network 2500 can eliminate the dummy top node 2516, beta node 2518, and beta memory 2520 if desired.
Thereafter, beta node 2522 will read facts out of alpha memory 2508 and facts out of beta memory 2520 to find if any of the facts are overlapping. If so, these facts satisfy both C1 and C2, and the beta node 2522 writes these facts to beta memory 2524.
Next, beta node 2526 reads facts out of alpha memory 2512 and beta memory 2524 to find if any of the facts are overlapping. If so, these facts satisfy C1, C2, and C4 and the beta node 2526 writes these facts to beta memory 2532. In parallel with beta node 2526, beta node 2528 operates to read facts out of alpha memory 2510 and beta memory 2524 to find if any of the facts are overlapping. If so, these facts satisfy C1, C2, and C3, thereby meeting the requirements of rule R1. Beta node 2528 writes these R1-compliant facts to beta memory 2530. Thus, any facts (or combination of facts) present in memory 2530 are known to satisfy rule R1.
Next, beta node 2534 reads facts out of alpha memory 2510 and beta memory 2532 to find if any of the facts are overlapping. If so, these facts satisfy C1, C2, C4, and C3, thereby meeting the requirements of rule R3. Beta node 2534 writes these R3-compliant facts to beta memory 2538. In parallel with beta node 2538, beta node 2540 operates to read facts out of alpha memory 2514 and beta memory 2532 to find if any of the facts are overlapping. If so, these facts satisfy C1, C2, C4, and C5, thereby meeting the requirements of rule R2. Beta node 2536 writes these R2-compliant facts to beta memory 2540. Thus, any facts present in memory 2538 are known to satisfy rule R3 and any facts present in memory 2540 are known to satisfy R2.
Preferably, the beta nodes are also deployed in the coprocessor 450 (preferably as firmware application modules within the coprocessor's processing pipeline). Furthermore, the beta memories are also preferably deployed in available memory space of the coprocessor 450. Through hardware-acceleration of the alpha nodes and beta nodes in pipelined firmware application modules, the inventors believe that dramatic improvements in performance can be made for Rete networks.
While for the preferred embodiments disclosed herein the coprocessor 450 comprises a reconfigurable logic device 402 such as an FPGA, it should be noted that the coprocessor 450 can be realized using other processing devices. For example, the coprocessor 450 may comprise graphics processor units (GPUs), general purpose graphics processors, chip multi-processors (CMPs), dedicated memory devices, complex programmable logic devices, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and other I/O processing components. Moreover, it should be noted that appliance 200 may employ a plurality of coprocessors 450 in either or both of a sequential and a parallel multi-coprocessor architecture.
The modules described herein can be readily developed as firmware application modules by a practitioner of various embodiments of the invention using the techniques described in the above-referenced and incorporated U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0294059.
While the present invention has been described above in relation to its preferred embodiments, various modifications may be made thereto that still fall within the invention's scope. Such modifications to the invention will be recognizable upon review of the teachings herein. Accordingly, the full scope of the present invention is to be defined solely by the appended claims and their legal equivalents.
This patent application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/564,112, filed Sep. 9, 2019, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,965,317, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/222,054, filed Dec. 17, 2018, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,411,734, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/404,794, filed Jan. 12, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,158,377, which is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/759,430, filed Feb. 5, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,547,824, which is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/121,473, filed May 15, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,374,986, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3601808 | Vlack | Aug 1971 | A |
3611314 | Pritchard, Jr. et al. | Oct 1971 | A |
3729712 | Glassman | Apr 1973 | A |
3824375 | Gross et al. | Jul 1974 | A |
3848235 | Lewis et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
3906455 | Houston et al. | Sep 1975 | A |
4081607 | Vitols et al. | Mar 1978 | A |
4298898 | Cardot | Nov 1981 | A |
4314356 | Scarbrough | Feb 1982 | A |
4385393 | Chaure et al. | May 1983 | A |
4464718 | Dixon et al. | Aug 1984 | A |
4550436 | Freeman et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4823306 | Barbie et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4941178 | Chuang | Jul 1990 | A |
5023910 | Thomson | Jun 1991 | A |
5050075 | Herman et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5101424 | Clayton et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5140692 | Morita | Aug 1992 | A |
5161103 | Kosaka et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5163131 | Row et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5179626 | Thomson | Jan 1993 | A |
5208491 | Ebeling et al. | May 1993 | A |
5226165 | Martin | Jul 1993 | A |
5233539 | Agrawal et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5243655 | Wang | Sep 1993 | A |
5249292 | Chiappa | Sep 1993 | A |
5255136 | Machado et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5263156 | Bowen et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5265065 | Turtle | Nov 1993 | A |
5267148 | Kosaka et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5313560 | Maruoka et al. | May 1994 | A |
5319776 | Hile et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5327521 | Savic et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5339411 | Heaton, Jr. | Aug 1994 | A |
5347634 | Herrell et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5361373 | Gilson | Nov 1994 | A |
5371794 | Diffie et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5388259 | Fleischman et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5396253 | Chia | Mar 1995 | A |
5404411 | Banton et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5404488 | Kerrigan et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5418951 | Damashek | May 1995 | A |
5421028 | Swanson | May 1995 | A |
5432822 | Kaewell, Jr. | Jul 1995 | A |
5440723 | Arnold et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5461712 | Chelstowski et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5463701 | Kantner, Jr. et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5465353 | Hull et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5481735 | Mortensen et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5488725 | Turtle et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5497488 | Akizawa et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5517642 | Bezek et al. | May 1996 | A |
5544352 | Egger | Aug 1996 | A |
5546578 | Takada et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5651125 | Witt et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5687297 | Coonan et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5701464 | Aucsmith | Dec 1997 | A |
5704060 | Del Monte | Dec 1997 | A |
5712942 | Jennings et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5721898 | Beardsley et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5740466 | Geldman et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5774835 | Ozawa et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774839 | Shlomot | Jun 1998 | A |
5781772 | Wilkinson, III et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781921 | Nichols | Jul 1998 | A |
5805832 | Brown et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5813000 | Furlani | Sep 1998 | A |
5819273 | Vora et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5819290 | Fujita et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826075 | Bealkowski et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5864738 | Kessler et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5870730 | Furuya et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5886701 | Chauvin et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5913211 | Nitta | Jun 1999 | A |
5930753 | Potamianos et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5943421 | Grabon | Aug 1999 | A |
5943429 | Händel | Aug 1999 | A |
5978801 | Yuasa | Nov 1999 | A |
5987432 | Zusman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991881 | Conklin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995963 | Nanba et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6006264 | Colby et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6023760 | Karttunen | Feb 2000 | A |
6028939 | Yin | Feb 2000 | A |
6044407 | Jones et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6058391 | Gardner | May 2000 | A |
6064739 | Davis | May 2000 | A |
6067569 | Khaki et al. | May 2000 | A |
6070172 | Lowe | May 2000 | A |
6073160 | Grantham et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6105067 | Batra | Aug 2000 | A |
6134551 | Aucsmith | Oct 2000 | A |
6138176 | McDonald et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
RE36946 | Diffie et al. | Nov 2000 | E |
6147976 | Shand et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6169969 | Cohen | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175874 | Imai et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6226676 | Crump et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236980 | Reese | May 2001 | B1 |
6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6317795 | Malkin et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6336150 | Ellis et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6339819 | Huppenthal et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6370645 | Lee et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377942 | Hinsley et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381242 | Maher, III et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389532 | Gupta et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397259 | Lincke et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397335 | Franczek et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6412000 | Riddle et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6430272 | Maruyama et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6456632 | Baum et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463474 | Fuh et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6499107 | Gleichauf et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502133 | Baulier et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6535868 | Galeazzi et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6564263 | Bergman et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6578147 | Shanklin et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6625150 | Yu | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6704816 | Burke | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711558 | Indeck et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6765918 | Dixon et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6772345 | Shetty | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785677 | Fritchman | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6804667 | Martin | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807156 | Veres et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6839686 | Galant | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6850906 | Chadha et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6870837 | Ho et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6877044 | Lo et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6886103 | Brustoloni et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6901461 | Bennett | May 2005 | B2 |
6931408 | Adams et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6931545 | Ta et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6944168 | Paatela et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6978223 | Milliken | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6980976 | Alpha et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6981054 | Krishna | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7007208 | Hibbert et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7019674 | Cadambi et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7046848 | Olcott | May 2006 | B1 |
7093023 | Lockwood et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7127424 | Kemp, II et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139743 | Indeck et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7149715 | Browne et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7167980 | Chiu | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7177833 | Marynowski et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7181437 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7181608 | Fallon et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7222114 | Chan et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7224185 | Campbell et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225188 | Gai et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7251629 | Marynowski et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7275079 | Brodsky et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7287037 | An et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7305383 | Kubesh et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7305391 | Wyschogrod et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7363277 | Dutta et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7386564 | Abdo et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7408932 | Kounavis et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7411957 | Stacy et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7420931 | Nanda et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7444515 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7454418 | Wang | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7457834 | Jung et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7461064 | Fontoura et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7467155 | McCool et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7478431 | Nachenberg | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7480253 | Allan | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7487327 | Chang et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7496108 | Biran et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7552107 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7558925 | Bouchard et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7565525 | Vorbach et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7636703 | Taylor | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7660793 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7680790 | Indeck et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7685121 | Brown et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7685254 | Pandya | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7701945 | Roesch et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7702629 | Cytron et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7783862 | Cameron | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7805392 | Steele et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
7840482 | Singla et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7917299 | Buhler et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7921046 | Parsons et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7945528 | Cytron et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7949650 | Indeck et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8095508 | Chamberlain et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8275885 | Hu et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8374986 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8407588 | Hu et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8620881 | Chamberlain et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8751452 | Chamberlain et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8768888 | Chamberlain et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9176775 | Chamberlain et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9547824 | Indeck et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9633093 | Henrichs et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9633097 | Tidwell et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
10102260 | Lancaster et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10133802 | Lancaster et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10146845 | Henrichs et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10158377 | Indeck et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10411734 | Indeck et al. | Sep 2019 | B2 |
10621192 | Henrichs et al. | Apr 2020 | B2 |
10902013 | Lancaster et al. | Jan 2021 | B2 |
10949442 | Henrichs et al. | Mar 2021 | B2 |
10965317 | Indeck et al. | Mar 2021 | B2 |
20010013048 | Imbert de Tremiolles et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010014093 | Yoda et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010052038 | Fallon et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20010056547 | Dixon | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020031125 | Sato | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020069370 | Mack | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091691 | Sharp | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020095512 | Rana et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020103663 | Bankier et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020105911 | Pruthi et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020129140 | Peled et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020150248 | Kovacevic | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162025 | Sutton et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166063 | Lachman et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030009693 | Brock et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014521 | Elson et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014662 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018630 | Indeck et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023876 | Bardsley et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030037037 | Adams et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030043805 | Graham et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030051043 | Wyschogrod et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030065943 | Geis et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030074582 | Patel et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030110229 | Kulig et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115485 | Milliken | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030163715 | Wong | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030169877 | Liu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177253 | Schuehler et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030221013 | Lockwood et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040019703 | Burton | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040028047 | Hou et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040049596 | Schuehler et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040054924 | Chuah et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040064737 | Milliken et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040100977 | Suzuki et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040111632 | Halperin | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117645 | Okuda et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040153813 | Swoboda | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040162826 | Wyschogrod et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040177340 | Hsu et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040186804 | Chakraborty et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040186814 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040196905 | Yamane et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040199448 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205149 | Dillon et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050005145 | Teixeira | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050086520 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050131790 | Benzschawel et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050175010 | Wilson et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187844 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187845 | Eklund et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187846 | Subbu et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187847 | Bonissone et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187848 | Bonissone et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187849 | Bollapragada et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187974 | Gong | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050195832 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050229254 | Singh et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060020715 | Jungck | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031154 | Noviello et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031156 | Noviello et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031263 | Arrouye et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031737 | Chugg et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060036693 | Hulten et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060047636 | Mohania et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060053295 | Madhusudan et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059213 | Evoy | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060129745 | Thiel et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060198375 | Baik et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060242123 | Williams | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060259417 | Marynowski et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060269148 | Farber et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060294059 | Chamberlain et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070011175 | Langseth et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011183 | Langseth et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011317 | Brandyburg et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011687 | Ilik et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070061594 | Ginter et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067108 | Buhler et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067481 | Sharma et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070078837 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094199 | Deshpande et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070112748 | Angell et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070112837 | Houh et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118500 | Indeck et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070130140 | Cytron et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156574 | Marynowski et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070156669 | Marchisio et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070174841 | Chamberlain et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070179935 | Lee et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070209068 | Ansari et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070237327 | Taylor et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070244859 | Trippe et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070260602 | Taylor | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070277036 | Chamberlain et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070294157 | Singla et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080005062 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080021874 | Dahl et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080030383 | Cameron | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080040657 | Kuznetsov et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080077582 | Reed | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080084573 | Horowitz et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080086274 | Chamberlain et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080104542 | Cohen et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080109413 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114724 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114725 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114760 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126320 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080133453 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080133519 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080243675 | Parsons et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080307435 | Rehman | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090002379 | Baeza et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090007197 | Turner | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090182683 | Taylor et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090262741 | Jungck et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090287628 | Indeck et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090300054 | Fisher et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100088590 | Bajohr et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100094858 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100145902 | Boyan et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100198850 | Cytron et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100284532 | Burnett et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110040701 | Singla et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110078109 | Griggs et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110123021 | Tepper | May 2011 | A1 |
20120311411 | Kirkpatrick | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130151458 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20140114908 | Henrichs et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140114929 | Henrichs et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140279864 | Lopyrev et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150310077 | Lancaster et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150310078 | Lancaster et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150310087 | Tidwell et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20170123866 | Indeck et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20190079984 | Lancaster et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190108177 | Henrichs et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20200242126 | Henrichs et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0573991 | Dec 1993 | EP |
0880088 | Nov 1996 | EP |
0851358 | Jul 1998 | EP |
0887723 | Dec 1998 | EP |
0911738 | Apr 1999 | EP |
02136900 | May 1990 | JP |
03014075 | Jan 1991 | JP |
09145544 | Jun 1997 | JP |
2000286715 | Oct 2000 | JP |
2001357048 | Dec 2001 | JP |
2002101089 | Apr 2002 | JP |
199010910 | Sep 1990 | WO |
199409443 | Apr 1994 | WO |
199737735 | Oct 1997 | WO |
199905814 | Feb 1999 | WO |
2000041136 | Jul 2000 | WO |
2001022425 | Mar 2001 | WO |
2001039577 | Jun 2001 | WO |
2001061913 | Aug 2001 | WO |
2001080082 | Oct 2001 | WO |
2001080558 | Oct 2001 | WO |
2002061525 | Aug 2002 | WO |
2002082271 | Oct 2002 | WO |
2003100650 | Apr 2003 | WO |
2003036845 | May 2003 | WO |
2004017604 | Feb 2004 | WO |
2004042560 | May 2004 | WO |
2004042561 | May 2004 | WO |
2004042562 | May 2004 | WO |
2004042574 | May 2004 | WO |
2005017708 | Feb 2005 | WO |
2005026925 | Mar 2005 | WO |
2005048134 | May 2005 | WO |
2006023948 | Mar 2006 | WO |
2006096324 | Sep 2006 | WO |
2007064685 | Jun 2007 | WO |
2007087507 | Aug 2007 | WO |
2008063973 | May 2008 | WO |
2008063974 | May 2008 | WO |
2009029842 | Mar 2009 | WO |
2009089467 | Jul 2009 | WO |
2009140363 | Nov 2009 | WO |
2014066416 | May 2014 | WO |
2015164639 | Oct 2015 | WO |
2015164639 | Oct 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Kulig et al., “System and Method for Controlling Transmission of Data Packets Over an Information Network”, pending U.S. Patent Application. |
Lancaster et al., “Acceleration of Ungapped Extension in Mercury BLAST”, Seventh (7th) Workshop on Media and Streaming Processors, Nov. 12, 2005, Thirty-Eighth (38th) International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO-38), Barcelona, Spain. |
Li et al., “Large-Scale IP Traceback in High-Speed Internet: Practical Techniques and Theoretical Foundation”, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2004, pp. 1-15. |
Lin et al., “Real-Time Image Template Matching Based on Systolic Array Processor”, International Journal of Electronics; Dec. 1, 1992; pp. 1165-1176; vol. 73, No. 6; London, Great Britain. |
Lockwood et al., “Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX) for Distributed Routing and Queuing”, ACM International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA 2000), Monterey, CA, Feb. 2000, pp. 137-144. |
Lockwood et al., “Hello, World: A Simple Application for the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-00-12, Jul. 11, 2000. |
Lockwood et al., “Parallel FPGA Programming over Backplane Chassis”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-00-11, Jun. 12, 2000. |
Lockwood et al., “Reprogrammable Network Packet Processing on the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, ACM International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA 2001), Monterey, CA, Feb. 2001, pp. 87-93. |
Lockwood, “An Open Platform for Development of Network Processing Modules in Reprogrammable Hardware”, IEC DesignCon 2001, Santa Clara, CA, Jan. 2001, Paper WB-19. |
Lockwood, “Building Networks with Reprogrammable Hardware”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Evolvable Internet Hardware Platforms”, NASA/DoD Workshop on Evolvable Hardware (EHW'01), Long Beach, CA, Jul. 12-14, 2001, pp. 271-279. |
Lockwood, “Hardware Laboratory Configuration”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Introduction”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Platform and Methodology for Teaching Design of Hardware Modules in Internet Routers and Firewalls”, IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Microelectronic Systems Education (MSE'2001), Las Vegas, NV, Jun. 17-18, 2001, pp. 56-57. |
Lockwood, “Protocol Processing on the FPX”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Simulation and Synthesis”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Simulation of the Hello World Application for the Field-Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Applied Research Lab, Spring 2001 Gigabits Kits Workshop. |
Madhusudan, “Design of a System for Real-Time Worm Detection”, Hot Interconnects, pp. 77-83, Stanford, CA, Aug. 2004, found at http://www.hoti.org/hoti12/program/papers/2004/paper4.2.pdf. |
Madhusudan, “Design of a System for Real-Time Worm Detection”, Power Point Presentation in Support of Master's Thesis, Washington Univ., Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2004. |
Mao et al., “Cluster-based Online Monitoring System of Web Traffic”, Dept. of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua Univ., Bejing, 100084 P.R. China. |
Mosanya et al., “A FPGA-Based Hardware Implementation of Generalized Profile Search Using Online Arithmetic”, ACM/Sigda International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA '99), Feb. 21-23, 1999, pp. 101-111, Monterey, CA, USA. |
Moscola et al., “FPGrep and FPSed: Regular Expression Search and Substitution for Packet Streaming in Field Programmable Hardware”, Dept. of Computer Science, Applied Research Lab, Washington University, Jan. 8, 2002, unpublished, pp. 1-19, St. Louis, MO. |
Moscola et al., “FPSed: A Streaming Content Search-and-Replace Module for an Internet Firewall”, Proc. of Hot Interconnects, 11th Symposium on High Performance Interconnects, pp. 122-129, Aug. 20, 2003. |
Moscola, “FPGrep and FPSed: Packet Payload Processors for Managing the Flow of Digital Content on Local Area Networks and the Internet”, Master's Thesis, Sever Institute of Technology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2003. |
Navarro, “A Guided Tour to Approximate String Matching”, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 33, No. 1, Mar. 2001, pp. 31-88. |
Necker et al., “TCP-Stream Reassembly and State Tracking in Hardware”, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA. |
Niewczas et al., “A Pattern Matching Algorithm for Verification and Analysis of Very Large IC Layouts”, ACM, Apr. 1998, pp. 129-134. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/938,709 dated Aug. 27, 2009. |
Nunez et al., “The X-MatchLITE FPGA-Based Data Compressor”, Euromicro Conference 1999, Proceedings, Italy, Sep. 8-10, 1999, pp. 126-132, Los Alamitos, CA. |
Nwodoh et al., “A Processing System for Real-Time Holographic Video Computation”, Reconfigurable Technology: FPGAs for Computing and Application, Proceedings for the SPIE, Sep. 1999, Boston, pp. 129-140, vol. 3844. |
Office Action for GB Application 1019313.4 dated Jan. 3, 2012. |
Office Action for GB Application 1019313.4 dated Oct. 2, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/550,323 dated Jan. 3, 2011. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/938,709 dated Jan. 13, 2009. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/938,709 dated Jul. 14, 2008. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/694,622 dated Jun. 24, 2016. |
Partial International Search Report for PCT/US03/15638 dated Feb. 3, 2004. |
Rakash et al., “OC-3072 Packet Classification Using BDDs and Pipelined SRAMs”, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin. |
Pramanik et al., “A Hardware Pattern Matching Algorithm on a Dataflow”; Computer Journal; Jul. 1, 1985; pp. 264-269; vol. 28, No. 3; Oxford University Press, Surrey, Great Britain. |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 14/060,313, filed Oct. 22, 2013 (Henrichs et al.). |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 14/060,339, filed Oct. 22, 2013 (Henrichs et al.). |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/222,054, filed Dec. 17, 2018 (Indeck et al.), 409 pages. |
Ramakrishna et al., “A Performance Study of Hashing Functions for Hardware Applications”, Int. Conf. on Computing and Information, May 1994, pp. 1621-1636, vol. 1, No. 1. |
Ramakrishna et al., “Efficient Hardware Hashing Functions for High Performance Computers”, IEEE Transactions on Computers, Dec. 1997, vol. 46, No. 12. |
Ramesh et al., “Automatic Selection of Tuning Parameters for Feature Extraction Sequences”, IEEE, Jun. 21-23, 1994, pp. 672-677. |
Ratha et al., “Convolution on Splash 2”, Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on FPGAS for Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 19, 1995, pp. 204-213, Los Alamitos, California. |
Ratha et al., “FPGA-based coprocessor for text string extraction”, IEEE, Sep. 11-13, 2000, pp. 217-221. |
Roberts, “Internet Still Growing Dramatically Says Internet Founder”, Press Release, Caspian Networks, Inc.—Virtual Pressroom. |
Roesch, “Snort—Lightweight Intrusion Detection for Networks”, Proceedings of LISA '99: 13th Systems Administration Conference; Nov. 7-12, 1999; pp. 229-238; USENIX Association, Seattle, WA USA. |
Roy, “A bounded search algorithm for segmented channel routing for FPGA's and associated channel architecture Issues”, IEEE, Nov. 11, 1993, pp. 1695-1705, vol. 12. |
Dharmapurikar, “Fast and Scalable Pattern Matching for Content Filtering”, ACM, ANCS 05, 2005, pp. 183-192. |
Ebeling et al., “RaPiD—Reconfigurable Pipelined Datapath”, University of Washington, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, Sep. 23, 1996, Seattle, WA. |
Exegy Inc., “Exegy and HyperFeed to Unveil Exelerate TP at SIA Conference”, Release Date: Jun. 20, 2006, downloaded from http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/488004 on Jun. 19, 2007, 4 pages. |
Exegy Inc., “First Exegy Ticker Plant Deployed”, Release Date: Oct. 17, 2006, downloaded from http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/496530 on Jun. 19, 2007, 5 pages. |
Extended European Search Report for EP Application 13849798.7 dated Jul. 14, 2016. |
Feldman, “High Frequency Traders Get Boost From FPGA Acceleration”, Jun. 8, 2007, downloaded from http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc.1600113.html on Jun. 19, 2007, 4 pages. |
Feldmann, “BLT: Bi-Layer Tracing of HTTP and TCP/IP”, At&T Labs-Research, Florham Park, NJ, USA. |
Fernandez, “Template Matching of Binary Targets in Grey-Scale Images: A Nonparametric Approach”, Pattern Recognition, 1997, pp. 1175-1182, vol. 30, No. 7. |
Forgy, “RETE: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Matching Problem”, Artificial Intelligence, 1982, pp. 17-37, vol. 19. |
Franklin et al., “An Architecture for Fast Processing of Large Unstructured Data Sets.” Proc. of 22nd Int'l Conf. on Computer Design, Oct. 2004, pp. 280-287. |
Franklin et al., “Assisting Network Intrusion Detection with Reconfigurable Hardware”, Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM 2002), Apr. 2002, Napa, California. |
Fu et al., “The FPX KCPSM Module: An Embedded, Reconfigurable Active Processing Module for the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-01-14, Jul. 2001. |
Gavrila et al., “Multi-feature Hierarchical Template Matching Using Distance Transforms”, IEEE, Aug. 16-20, 1998, vol. 1, pp. 439-444. |
Google Search Results Page for “field programmable gate array financial calculation stock market” over dates of Jan. 1, 1990-May 21, 2002, 1 page. |
Guerdoux-Jamet et al., “Systolic Filter for Fast DNA Similarity Search”, IEEE, 1995, pp. 145-156. |
Gunther et al., “Assessing Document Relevance with Run-Time Reconfigurable Machines”, FPGAs for Custom Computing Machines, 1996, Proceedings, IEEE Symposium on, pp. 10-17, Napa Valley, CA, Apr. 17, 1996. |
Gupta et al., “High-Speed Implementations of Rule-Based Systems,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, May 1989, pp. 119-146, vol. 7, Issue 2. |
Gupta et al., “Packet Classification on Multiple Fields”, Computer Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. |
Gupta et al., “PMM: A Parallel Architecture for Production Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Apr. 1992, pp. 693-696, vol. 2. |
Gurtov, “Effect of Delays on TCP Performance”, Cellular Systems Development, Sonera Corporation, online at http://cs.helsinki.fi/u/gurtov/papers/pwc01.pdf. |
Gyang, “NCBI BLASTN Stage 1 in Reconfigurable Hardware,” Technical Report WUCSE-2005-30, Aug. 2004, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Washington University, St. Louis, MO. |
Halaas et al., “A Recursive MISD Architecture for Pattern Matching”, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration, vol. 12, No. 7, pp. 727-734, Jul. 2004. |
Jacobson et al., “tcpdump—dump traffic on a network”, Jun. 30, 1997, online at www.cse.cuhk.edu.hk/˜cslui/CEG4430/tcpdump.ps.gz. |
Johnson et al., “Pattern Matching in Reconfigurable Logic for Packet Classification”, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA. |
Jones et al., “A Probabilistic Model of Information Retrieval: Development and Status”, Information Processing and Management, Aug. 1998, 76 pages. |
Keutzer et al., “A Survey of Programmable Platforms—Network Proc”, University of California-Berkeley, pp. 1-29. |
Koloniari et al., “Content-Based Routing of Path Queries in Peer-to-Peer Systems”, pp. 1-19, E. Bertino et al. (Eds.): EDBT 2004, LNCS 2992, pp. 29-47, 2004, copyright by Springer-Verlag, Germany. |
Krishnamurthy et al., “Biosequence Similarity Search on the Mercury System”, Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Conference on Application-Specific Systems, Architectures, and Processors (ASAP04), Sep. 2004, pp. 365-375. |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 16/564,112, filed Sep. 9, 2019 (Indeck et al.), 592 pages. |
“A Reconfigurable Computing Model for Biological Research Application of Smith-Waterman Analysis to Bacterial Genomes” A White Paper Prepared by Star Bridge Systems, Inc. [retrieved Dec. 12, 2006], Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.starbridgesystems.com/resources/whitepapers/Smith%20 Waterman%20Whitepaper.pdf. |
“ACTIV Financial Announces Hardware Based Market Data Feed Processing Strategy”, For Release on Apr. 2, 2007, 2 pages. |
“ACTIV Financial Delivers Accelerated Market Data Feed”, Apr. 6, 2007, byline of Apr. 2, 2007, downloaded from http://hpcwire.com/hpc.1346816.html on Jun. 19, 2007, 3 pages. |
“DRC, Exegy Announce Joint Development Agreement”, Jun. 8, 2007, byline of Jun. 4, 2007; downloaded from http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc/1595644.html on Jun. 19, 2007, 3 pages. |
“Lucent Technologies Delivers “PayloadPlus” Network Processors for Programmable, MultiProtocol, OC-48c Processing”, Lucent Technologies Press Release, downloaded from http://www.lucent.com/press/1000/0010320.meb.html on Mar. 21, 2002. |
“Overview, Field Programmable Port Extender”, Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002, pp. 1-4. |
“Payload Plus™ Agere System Interface”, Agere Systems Product Brief, Jun. 2001, downloaded from Internet, Jan. 2002, pp. 1-6. |
“RFC793: Transmission Control Protocol, Darpa Internet Program, Protocol Specification”, Sep. 1981. |
“Technology Overview”, Data Search Systems Incorporated, downloaded from the http://www.datasearchsystems.com/tech.htm on Apr. 19, 2004. |
“The Field-Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, downloaded from http://www.arl.wustl.edu/arl/ in Mar. 2002. |
Aldwairi et al., “Configurable String Matching Hardware for Speeding up Intrusion Detection”, SIRARCH Comput. Archit. News, vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 99-107, Mar. 2005. |
Amanuma et al., “A FPGA Architecture for High Speed Computation”, Proceedings of 60th Convention Architecture, Software Science, Engineering, Mar. 14, 2000, pp. 1-163-1-164, Information Processing Society, Japan. |
Amer-Yahia et al., “XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 Full-Text 1.0”, W3C Working Draft, http://www.w3.org/TR/query-full-text/, May 18, 2007—parts 1-4. |
Anerousis et al., “Using the AT&T Labs Packetscope for Internet Measurement, Design, and Performance Analysis”, Network and Distributed Systems Research Laboratory, AT&T Labs-Research, Florham, Park, NJ, Oct. 1997. |
Anonymous, “Method for Allocating Computer Disk Space to a File of Known Size”, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 27, No. 10B, Mar. 1, 1985, New York. |
Arnold et al., “The Splash 2 Processor and Applications”, Proceedings 1993 IEEE International Conference on Computer Design: VLSI in Computers and Processors (ICCD '93), Oct. 3, 1993, pp. 482-485, IEEE Computer Society, Cambridge, MA USA. |
Artan et al., “Multi-packet Signature Detection using Prefix Bloom Filters”, 2005, IEEE, pp. 1811-1816. |
Asami et al., “Improvement of DES Key Search on FPGA-Based Parallel Machine “RASH””, Proceedings of Information Processing Society, Aug. 15, 2000, pp. 50-57, vol. 41, No. SIG5 (HPS1), Japan. |
Baboescu et al., “Scalable Packet Classification,” SIGCOMM'01, Aug. 27-31, 2001, pp. 199-210, San Diego, California, USA; http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/homepages/shivkuma/teaching/sp2001/readings/baboescu-pkt-classification.pdf. |
Baer, “Computer Systems Architecture”, 1980, pp. 262-265; Computer Science Press, Potomac, Maryland. |
Baeza-Yates et al., “New and Faster Filters for Multiple Approximate String Matching”, Random Structures and Algorithms (RSA), Jan. 2002, pp. 23-49, vol. 20, No. 1. |
Baker et al., “High-throughput Linked-Pattem Matching for Intrusion Detection Systems”, ANCS 2005: Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Architecture for Networking and Communications Systems, pp. 193-202, ACM Press, 2005. |
Barone-Adesi et al., “Efficient Analytic Approximation of American Option Values”, Journal of Finance, vol. 42, No. 2 (Jun. 1987), pp. 301-320. |
Behrens et al., “BLASTN Redundancy Filter in Reprogrammable Hardware,” Final Project Submission, Fall 2003, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Washington University. |
Berk, “JLex: A lexical analyzer generator for Java™ ”, downloaded from http://www.cs.princeton.edu/˜appel/modem/lava/Jlex/ in Jan. 2002, pp. 1-18. |
Bloom, “Space/Time Trade-offs in Hash Coding With Allowable Errors”, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 1970, pp. 422-426, vol. 13, No. 7, Computer Usage Company, Newton Upper Falls, Massachusetts, USA. |
Braun et al., “Layered Protocol Wrappers for Internet Packet Processing in Reconfigurable Hardware”, Proceedings of Hot Interconnects 9 (Hotl-9) Stanford, CA, Aug. 22-24, 2001, pp. 93-98. |
Braun et al., “Protocol Wrappers for Layered Network Packet Processing in Reconfigurable Hardware”, IEEE Micro, Jan.-Feb. 2002, pp. 66-74. |
Brodie et al., “Dynamic Reconfigurable Computing”, in Proc. of 9th Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices International Conference, Sep. 2006. |
Cavnar et al., “N-Gram-Based Text Categorization”, Proceedings of SDAIR-94, 3rd Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval, Las Vegas, pp. 161-175, 1994. |
Chamberlain et al., “Achieving Real Data Throughput for an FPGA Co-Processor on Commodity Server Platforms”, Proc. of 1 st Workshop on Building Block Engine Architectures for Computers and Networks, Oct. 2004, Boston, MA. |
Chamberlain et al., “The Mercury System: Embedding Computation Into Disk Drives”, 7th High Performance Embedded Computing Workshop, Sep. 2003, Boston, MA. |
Chaney et al., “Design of a Gigabit ATM Switch”, Washington University, St. Louis. |
Cho et al., “Deep Packet Filter with Dedicated Logic and Read Only Memories”, 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 2004. |
Cho, “A Fast Regular Expression Indexing Engine”, Proc. of 18th Int'l Conv. on Data Engineering, 2001, pp. 1-12. |
Choi et al., “Design of a Flexible Open Platform for High Performance Active Networks”, Allerton Conference, 1999, Champaign, IL. |
Clark et al., “Scalable Pattern Matching for High Speed Networks”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, 2004; FCCM 2004, Apr. 20-23, 2004; pp. 249-257; IEEE Computer Society; Cambridge, MA USA. |
Cloutier et al., “VIP: An FPGA-Based Processor for Image Processing and Neural Networks”, Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Microelectronics for Neural Networks, Feb. 12, 1996, pp. 330-336, Los Alamitos, California. |
Compton et al., “Configurable Computing: A Survey of Systems and Software”, Technical Report, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, 1999. |
Compton et al., “Reconfigurable Computing: A Survey of Systems and Software”, Technical Report, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, 1999, presented by Yi-Gang Tai. |
Cong et al., “An Optional Technology Mapping Algorithm for Delay Optimization in Lookup-Table Based FPGA Designs”, IEEE, 1992, pp. 48-53. |
Crosman, “Who Will Cure Your Data Latency?”, Storage & Servers, Jun. 20, 2007, URL: http://www.networkcomputing.com/article/printFullArticleSrc.jhtml?article ID=199905630. |
Cuppu and Jacob, “Organizational Design Trade-Offs at the DRAM, Memory Bus and Memory Controller Level: Initial Results,” Technical Report UMB-SCA-1999-2, Univ. of Maryland Systems & Computer Architecture Group, Nov. 1999, pp. 1-10. |
Denoyer et al., “HMM-based Passage Models for Document Classification and Ranking”, Proceedings of ECIR-01, 23rd European Colloquim Information Retrieval Research, Darmstatd, DE, pp. 126-135, 2001. |
Department of Computer Sciences Engineering; “Technical Reports”; Publication (http://cse.seas.wustl.edu/Research/Publications.asp); Dec. 17, 2007; pp. 1-26; Washington University in St. Louis. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Deep Packet Inspection Using Parallel Bloom Filters,” IEEE Micro, Jan.-Feb. 2004, vol. 24, Issue: 1, pp. 52-61. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Deep Packet Inspection Using Parallel Bloom Filters,” Symposium on High Performance Interconnects (Hotl), Stanford, California, 2003, pp. 44-51. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Design and Implementation of a String Matching System for Network Intrusion Detection using FPGA-based Bloom Filters”, Proc. of 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field Programmable Custom Computing Machines, 2004, pp. 1-10. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Longest Prefix Matching Using Bloom Filters,” SIGCOMM, 2003, pp. 201-212. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Robust TCP Stream Reassembly in the Presence of Adversaries”, Proc. of the 14th Conference on USENIX Security Symposium—vol. 14, 16 pages, Baltimore, MD, 2005; http://www.icir.org/vern/papers/TcpReassembly/TCPReassembly-pdf. |
Sachin Tandon, “A Programmable Architecture for Real-Time Derivative Trading”, Master's Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2003. |
Schmerken, “With Hyperfeed Litigation Pending, Exegy Launches Low-Latency Ticker Plant”, in Wall Street & Technology Blog, Mar. 20, 2007, pp. 1-2. |
Schmit, “Incremental Reconfiguration for Pipelined Applications”, FPGAs for Custom Computing Machines, Proceedings, The 5th Annual IEEE Symposium, Dept. of ECE, Carnegie Mellon University, Apr. 16-18, 1997, pp. 47-55, Pittsburgh, PA. |
Schuehler et al., “Architecture for a Hardware Based, TCP/IP Content Scanning System”, IEEE Micro, 24(1):62-69, Jan.-Feb. 2004, USA. |
Schuehler et al., “TCP-Splitter: A TCP/IP Flow Monitor in Reconfigurable Hardware”, Hot Interconnects 10 (Hotl-10), Stanford, CA, Aug. 21-23, 2002, pp. 127-131. |
Search Results from IEEE Xplore for “Deterministic Finite Automaton current states”, dated Dec. 28, 2010, 2 pages, citing COLE, “Real-Time Computation by n-Dimensional Iterative Arrays of Finite-State Machines”, 1966; KASHYAP, “Syntactic Decision Rules for Recognition of Spoken Words and Phrases Using a Stochastic Automaton”, 1979 Rouvellou, “Inference of a Probabilistic Finite State Machine from its Output”, 1995; and Yi, “A Method of Instance Learning based on Finite-State Automaton and its Application on TCM Medical Cases”, 2010, et al. |
Seki et al., “High Speed Computation of Shogi With FPGA”, Proceedings of 58th Convention Architecture, Software Science, Engineering, Mar. 9, 1999, pp. 1-133-1-134. |
Shah, “Understanding Network Processors”, Version 1.0, University of California-Berkeley, Sep. 4, 2001. |
Shalunov et al., “Bulk TCP Use and Performance on Internet 2”, ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop, 2001. |
Shirazi et al., “Quantitative Analysis of FPGA-based Database Searching”, Journal of VLSI Signal Processing Systems for Signal, Image, and Video Technology, May 2001, pp. 85-96, vol. 28, No. ½, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, NL. |
Sidhu et al., “Fast Regular Expression Matching Using FPGAs”, IEEE Symposium on Field Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM 2001), Apr. 2001. |
Sidhu et al., “String Matching on Multicontext FPGAs Using Self-Reconfiguration”, FPGA '99: Proceedings of the 1999 ACM/SIGDA 7th International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays, Feb. 1999, pp. 217-226. |
Singh et al., “The EarlyBird System for Real-Time Detection on Unknown Worms”, Technical report CS2003-0761, Aug. 2003. |
Sourdis and Pnevmatikatos, “Fast, Large-Scale String Match for a 10Gbps FPGA-based Network Intrusion Detection System”, 13th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications, 2003. |
Steinbach et al., “A Comparison of Document Clustering Techniques”, KDD Workshop on Text Mining, 2000. |
Tan et al., “A High Throughput String Matching Architecture for Intrusion Detection and Prevention”, ISCA 2005: 32nd Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pp. 112-122, 2005. |
Tang et al., “A Novel Data Format Conversion Method Based on FPGA”, Cross Strait Quad-Regional Radio Science and Wireless Technology Conference, Jul. 26, 2011, pp. 1204-1207. |
Tau et al., “Transit Note #114: A First Generation DPGA Implementation”, Jan. 1995, 9 pages. |
Taylor et al., “Dynamic Hardware Plugins (DHP): Exploiting Reconfigurable Hardware for High-Performance Programmable Routers”, Computer Networks, 38(3): 295-310 (16), Feb. 21, 2002, and online at http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/AY2007/cs8803hpc_fall/papers/phplugins.pdf. |
Taylor et al., “Generalized RAD Module Interface Specification of the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX) Version 2”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report, Jul. 5, 2001, pp. 1-10. |
Taylor et al., “Modular Design Techniques for the FPX”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Taylor et al., “Scalable Packet Classification using Distributed Crossproducting of Field Labels”, Proceedings of IEEE Infocom, Mar. 2005, pp. 1-12, vol. 20, No. 1. |
Taylor, “Models, Algorithms, and Architectures for Scalable Packet Classification”, doctoral thesis, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2004, pp. 1-201. |
Thomson Reuters, “Mellanox InfiniBand Accelerates the Exegy Ticker Plant at Major Exchanges”, Jul. 22, 2008, URL: http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS125385+22-Jul-2008+BW20080722. |
Uluski et al., “Characterizing Antivirus Workload Execution”, SIGARCH Comput. Archit. News, vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 90-98, Mar. 2005. |
Villasenor et al., “Configurable Computing Solutions for Automatic Target Recognition”, FPGAS for Custom Computing Machines, 1996, Proceedings, IEEE Symposium on Napa Valley, CA, Apr. 17-19, 1996, pp. 70-79, 1996 IEEE, Napa Valley, CA, Los Alamitos, CA, USA. |
Waldvogel et al., “Scalable High-Speed Prefix Matching”, ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, Nov. 2001, pp. 440-482, vol. 19, No. 4. |
Ward et al., “Dynamically Reconfigurable Computing: A Novel Computation Technology with Potential to Improve National Security Capabilities”, May 15, 2003, A White Paper Prepared by Star Bridge Systems, Inc. [retrieved Dec. 12, 2006]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.starbridgesystems.com/resources/whitepapers/Dynamically%20Reconfigurable%20Computing.pdf. |
Weaver et al., “Very Fast Containment of Scanning Worms”, Proc. USENIX Security Symposium 2004, San Diego, CA, Aug. 2004, located at http://www.icsi.berkely.edu/˜nweaver/containment/containment.pdf. |
Web-Pop (Professional Options Package) (www.pmpublishing.com). |
West et al., “An FPGA-Based Search Engine for Unstructured Database”, Proc. of 2nd Workshop on Application Specific Processors, Dec. 2003, San Diego, CA. |
Wooster et al., “HTTPDUMP Network HTTP Packet Snooper”, Apr. 25, 1996. |
Yamaguchi et al., “An Approach for Homology Search with Reconfigurable Hardware”, Google, 2001, pp. 374-375. |
Yamaguchi et al., “High Speed Homology Search with FPGAs”, Proceedings Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, Jan. 3-7, 2002, pp. 271-282, vol. 7, Online, Lihue, Hawaii, USA. |
Yan et al., “Enhancing Collaborative Spam Detection with Bloom Filters”, 2006, IEEE, pp. 414-425. |
Yoshitani et al., “Performance Evaluation of Parallel Volume Rendering Machine Re Volver/C40”, Study Report of Information Processing Society, Mar. 5, 1999, pp. 79-84, vol. 99, No. 21. |
Smith, E. (Oct. 10, 1994). QuickLogic QuickWorks guarantees fastest FPGA design cycle. Business Wire Retrieved from https:// dialog.proquest.com/professional/docview/447031280?accountid= <https://dialog.proquest.com/professional/docview/447031280?accountid=> 131444 <https://dialogproquest.com/ professional/docview/447031280?accountid=131444> retrieved Sep. 16, 2020 (Year: 1994). |
OrCAD unveils strategy for leadership of mainstream programmable logic design market; strategy includes partnerships and a next generation product, OrCAD express for windows: A shrink-wrapped 32-bit windows application that includes VHDL simulation and synthesis. (Jun. 3, 1996). Retrieved Sep. 16, 2020 (Year: 1996). |
Harris, “Pete's Blog: Can FPGAs Overcome the FUD?”, Low-Latency.com, May 14, 2007, URL: http://www.a-teamgroup.com/article/pete-blog-can-fpgas-overcome-the-fud/. |
Hauck et al., “Software Technologies for Reconfigurable Systems”, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, Technical Report, 1996. |
Hayes, “Computer Architecture and Organization”, Second Edition, 1988, pp. 448-459, McGraw-Hill, Inc. |
Herbordt et al., “Single Pass, BLAST-Like, Approximate String Matching on FPGAs”, 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM'06), Apr. 2006, pp. 1-10, IEEE. |
Hezel et al., “FPGA-Based Template Matching Using Distance Transforms”, Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 22, 2002, pp. 89-97, IEEE Computer Society, USA. |
Hirsch, “Tech Predictions for 2008”, Reconfigurable Computing, Jan. 16, 2008, URL: http://fpgacomputing.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html. |
Hollaar, “Hardware Systems for Text Information Retrieval”, Proceedings of the Sixth Annual International ACM Sigir Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Jun. 6-8, 1983, pp. 3-9, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. |
Hutchings et al., “Assisting Network Intrusion Detection with Reconfiaurable Hardware”. FCCM 2002: 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machine, 2002. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability (Chapter I) for PCT/US2009/043759 dated Nov. 25, 2010. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2009/043759 dated Jul. 1, 2009. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2001/011255 dated Jul. 10, 2003. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2002/033286 dated Jan. 22, 2003. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2003/015638 dated May 6, 2004. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2004/016021 dated Aug. 18, 2005. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2004/016398 dated Apr. 12, 2005. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2005/030046; dated Sep. 25, 2006. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2006/006105 dated Oct. 31, 2006. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2006/045653 dated Jul. 8, 2008. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2007/060835 dated Jul. 9, 2007. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2007/084464 dated Oct. 2, 2008. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2007/084466 dated Jul. 23, 2008. |
Jacobson et al., “RFC 1072: TCP Extensions for Long-Delay Paths”, Oct. 1988. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20210218417 A1 | Jul 2021 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13759430 | Feb 2013 | US |
Child | 15404794 | US | |
Parent | 12121473 | May 2008 | US |
Child | 13759430 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16564112 | Sep 2019 | US |
Child | 17215560 | US | |
Parent | 16222054 | Dec 2018 | US |
Child | 16564112 | US | |
Parent | 15404794 | Jan 2017 | US |
Child | 16222054 | US |