A computer program listing appendix has been submitted in accordance with 37 C.F.R. 1.96(c), 1.77(b)(4) and 1.52(e). The afore-mentioned computer program listing appendix comprises a single compact disk having stored thereon the following files: “schema.txt” (created 15 Jul. 2005 having 3,762,902 bytes); and “api.txt” (created 15 Jul. 2005 having 62,157 bytes). File schema.txt is an ASCII text file comprising concatenated source code files that, collectively, specify an illustrative class schema in accordance with one embodiment of the invention (see, for example, element 215 in
The invention relates generally to enterprise management systems and more particularly to the reconciliation of objects (representing resources) input to the management system from different sources.
Today's businesses rely on a myriad of complex software applications to service customers or clients as well as to manage internal operations. Many of these applications require an extensive set of information technology (“IT”) components, some unique and some shared with other applications. It will be appreciated that in an enterprise environment in which an organization's network (or interconnected networks) can span diverse geographical locations and include a number of different computational platforms, operating systems, protocols, and network architectures, it is becoming more and more important to know what resources are available so that they may be used most efficiently in supporting the businesses needs. In addition, regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley are putting pressure on businesses to accurately discover, track and report what resources they own, who has access to them, and the change history around those systems and software. As used herein, the term “resource” includes, but is not limited to, computer systems, components of computer systems, data storage systems, switches, routers, memory, software applications (e.g., accounting and database applications), operating systems and business services (e.g., order entry or change management and tracking services).
In large computing environments or enterprises, multiple applications may be used to “discover” or detect resources comprising, or available for use by or within, the computing environment. In such situations, a single resource may have been discovered and reported to an enterprise's configuration management system multiple times. Thus, it would be beneficial to provide a mechanism to identify and reconcile the discovery of IT resources from multiple sources. Only with this capability can an enterprise's resources be effectively managed.
In one embodiment the invention provides a method to reconcile computer resources identified by resource discovery operations. The method includes accessing information describing one or more resources obtained from a plurality of discovery sources; identifying, via the accessed information, at least one resource that has been detected or discovered by at least two of the discovery sources; and merging the attribute values associated with the resource (from each of the discovery sources that detected the resource) into a reconciled resource object. The method may be stored in any media that is readable and executable by a computer system. In addition, methods in accordance with the invention may be executed by one or more processing units comprising a computer system.
Techniques to reconcile the detection of computational resources (e.g., hardware, software and services) from a number of different sources are described. The following embodiments of the invention, described in terms of a change configuration management system, are illustrative only and are not to be considered limiting in any respect.
Referring to
Referring to
One embodiment of identification phase 105 is shown in detail in
Generally, reconciliation engine 205 uses identification rules 235 to drive the match process. In one embodiment, identification rules 235 are organized into identification groups, with each rule specifying what attributes should be considered when determining a match, the type of object to be matched and the discovery source or dataset to which the rule applies. Identification groups may contain any number of rules and, in addition, may be ordered such that individual rules within a group are processed in a given order. For example, if Dataset1 represents the bulk of discovered resources and Dataset2 contains relatively few instances, it is more likely that an unidentified object will find a match in Dataset1. As such, Dataset1 may be listed (and processed) before Dataset2 in the identification group. Alternatively, if Dataset2 represents resources discovered by a particularly robust or accurate discovery process, it may be searched first.
It will be recognized that class schema 215 (see
Referring again to
Referring now
Referring once again to
It will be recognized that if after identification phase 105 one or more resource object instances remain unidentified, it may be necessary to either refine the identification rules or perform a match manually through, for example, a user interface. In one embodiment of a manual identification operation, the user could be presented with a list of unidentified resource object instances and a list of identified resource object instances. The user could then select an unidentified resource object instance, perform searches to refine the candidate list of identified instances, select an identified resource object instance, and apply the identity (e.g., the Reconciliation_ID attribute value of the unidentified resource object instance would be set to the value of the Reconciliation_ID attribute of the identified resource object instance).
In the embodiments described herein, merge phase 110 pulls together resource object instances from different datasets that, thru identification phase 105, have been assigned the same Reconciliation_ID attribute value and either modifies or creates an instance of the resource object in a resulting dataset (e.g., reconciled dataset 215). One particular embodiment of merge phase 110 is shown in detail in
In one embodiment, the attribute merge operation of block 605 is shown in
Reconciliation engine 205 uses merge rules 240 to assign a weight value to each attribute for each resource object reconciled in accordance with
With respect to default weight value 810 (815), this is the weight value assigned to each attribute of each object in associated dataset 225 (230) if no class or attribute specific rule 820 (825) exists to override it. Class or attribute specific rules 820 (825) can be put in place to override any default value. For example, a class specific rule could stipulate that all resource objects of a given type (e.g., a computer system resource object or storage media resource object) be assigned a specified value. Similarly, an attribute specific rule could stipulate that one or more attributes in a designated object class be assigned a specified value. Class or attribute specific rules 820 and 825 may include no rules or any combination of one or more class or attribute specific rules.
In one embodiment of the invention, weight values are assigned to specific resource objects' attributes during the acts of block 710 in accordance with the algorithm shown in Table 2. TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Illustrative Attribute Weight Assignment Algorithm IF an attribute-specific merge rule is defined for the attribute, Use the weight value specified by the rule; ELSE IF a class-specific merge rule is defined for the class to which the attribute's associated instance belongs, Use the weight value specified by the rule; ELSE IF a class-specific merge rule is defined for a super-class to which the attribute's associated instance belongs, Use the weight value specified by the rule; ELSE use the default weight value associated with the merge group.
With respect to a merge group's inheritance flag (e.g., 830 and 835), class and attribute specific merge rules (e.g., 820 and 825) may be made to apply in accordance with the inheritance properties of the data objects to which they are associated. For example, if a merge group's inheritance flag is set to “Yes” (or some functionally equivalent value), the weight assigned to any given attribute will be that weight that accounts for, or incorporates, the inheritance of the attribute's associated object class. By way of example, consider the case where objects of type ClassA and ClassB are defined in class schema 215, ClassB objects being a subclass of ClassA objects. Further, let ClassA objects include attributes A1 and A2 and ClassB objects include an attribute A3. If the relevant merge group includes class specific rules that specify a weight value of 200 for all attributes from objects of ClassA and a weight value of 600 for all attributes from objects of ClassB, then the attributes for an instance of ClassB would have the following weight values: A1=200; A2=200; and A3=600. If, on the other hand, the merge group's inheritance flag is set to “No” (or some functionally equivalent value), and the merge group's default weight value was 100, the attributes for an instance of ClassB would have the following weight values: A1=100; A2=100; and A3=600.
With respect to a merge group's defer if null indicator (e.g., 840 and 845), this parameter allows a user to specify what action to take when an attribute of an instance of a resource object has a “null” or “no” value. The defer if null indicator allows the user to defer to the dataset with the next weight for a given attribute if the highest weighted value is “null.” This allows a user to basically say, “I'd rather have some value than no value at all, even if the source isn't the highest weighted.” For example, if the relevant merge group's defer if null indicator is set to “True” (or some functionally equivalent value), the dataset with the next weight for a given attribute value is checked: if it's defer if null value is “False” (or some functionally equivalent value), the attribute's value is assigned; if its value is also null, then the next value is checked and so on, until all the datasets have been checked. If no mating value is detected, the attribute may be assigned a null or “nothing” value.
With respect to a merge group's attribute value combination designator (e.g., 850 and 855), this parameter allows a user to assign more than one value to an attribute of a reconciled object. For example, if the relevant merge group's attribute value combination designation is set to “Yes” (or some functionally equivalent value), the attribute values for each instance in a group may be combined (e.g., concatenated with individual values separated by a semicolon or comma) with the resulting list being assigned to the corresponding attribute value in the reconciled object. If the relevant merge group's attribute value combination designation is set to “No” (or some functionally equivalent value), the value assigned to the reconciled object's attribute is that value associated with the highest weight as described above.
Various changes in the details in the components and illustrated operational methods are possible without departing from the scope of the following claims. For instance, database 210 may be embodied as a distributed or federated database. In addition, identification rules 235 may use more than a single attribute to perform a match (see
The preceding description has been presented to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the invention as claimed and is provided in the context of the particular examples discussed below, variations of which will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art. Accordingly, the claims appended hereto are not intended to be limited by the disclosed embodiments, but are to be accorded their widest scope consistent with the principles and features disclosed herein.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/204,189, filed Aug. 15, 2005, entitled “Resource Reconciliation”, which claims priority to and the benefit of U.S. provisional patent application entitled “Change Configuration Management,” filed Dec. 6, 2004, assigned Ser. No. 60/633,640, which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5761505 | Golson et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5946681 | Shorter | Aug 1999 | A |
5948055 | Pulsipher | Sep 1999 | A |
5991877 | Luckenbaugh | Nov 1999 | A |
6041058 | Flanders et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6212266 | Busuioc | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6266513 | Briancon | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6286047 | Ramanathan et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6336138 | Caswell et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6496838 | Zamora-McKelvy et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6820090 | Chambers et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6836798 | Adams | Dec 2004 | B1 |
7003402 | Christie et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7082426 | Musgrove et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7146380 | Schaepe et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7155427 | Prothia et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7346044 | Chou et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7380025 | Riggins et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7395256 | Ji et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
8166002 | Robinson et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8554750 | Rangarajan et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8683032 | Spinelli et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8712979 | Morozov et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8799436 | Ayachitula et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
9137115 | Mayfield et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9158799 | Morozov | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9323801 | Morozov et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
20020002555 | Wolman et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020009085 | Barkai et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020143935 | Schenkel et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020184529 | Foster et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030058813 | Viola et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030126108 | Martino et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030200294 | Thorpe et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040019672 | Das et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040025157 | Blight et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040143600 | Musgrove et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040146008 | Conradt et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040220963 | Chen et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040264435 | Chari et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050038889 | Frietsch | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050080613 | Colledge et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050111362 | Freytsis et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050216433 | Bland et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050234973 | Zeng et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060059253 | Goodman et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060064481 | Baron et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060069801 | Rich et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060080656 | Cain et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060106590 | Tseng et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060123104 | Spinelli et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060123393 | Atkins et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136459 | Trinon et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136585 | Mayfield et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060178954 | Thukral et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060179124 | Stefaniak et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060271341 | Brown et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070097959 | Taylor et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070239700 | Ramachandran | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080021917 | Baker et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080183724 | Mueller | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080301081 | Karnik et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090063562 | Dinger et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090094462 | Madduri | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090319932 | Robinson et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100161577 | Morozov | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110238637 | Morozov et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120259812 | Rangarajan et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130007011 | Setlur et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130124681 | Rudenko et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20140143416 | Spinelli et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140195504 | Morozov et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140279992 | Morozov | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20160034503 | Morozov | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160196307 | Morozov et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/164,524, dated Mar. 3, 2017, 22 pages. |
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/476,704, dated Jul. 26, 2017, 14 pages. |
Advisory Action Received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Apr. 22, 2016, 3 Pages. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Feb. 3, 2016, 41 Pages. |
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/164,524, dated Jan. 29, 2016, 13 Pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Sep. 29, 2015, 26 pages. |
Restriction Requirement for U.S. Appl. No. 14/164,524, dated Oct. 30, 2015, 7 pages. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/204,437, dated Dec. 21, 2015, 7 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, dated Feb. 22, 2010, 11 pages. |
Advisory Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, dated May 4, 2010, 3 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, filed Mar. 26, 2014, 10 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, dated Dec. 8, 2014, 9 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, filed Mar. 30, 2015, 10 pages. |
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 11/204,189, dated May 8, 2015, 7 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/295,363, filed Jan. 18, 2013, 14 pages. |
Non Final Office Action mailed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/295,363, dated Apr. 3, 2013, 23 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/295,363, filed Jul. 3, 2013, 18 pages. |
Notice of Allowance mailed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/295,363, dated Nov. 4, 2013, 23 pages. |
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, dated Jun. 22, 2012, 13 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, filed Sep. 19, 2012, 15 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, dated Oct. 5, 2012, 16 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, filed Nov. 21, 2012, 13 pages. |
Advisory Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, dated Nov. 29, 2012, 3 pages. |
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/860,334, dated Dec. 17, 2013, 13 pages. |
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Jun. 21, 2012, 24 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, filed Sep. 19, 2012, 15 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Oct. 17, 2012, 38 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, filed Nov. 21, 2012, 16 pages. |
Advisory Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Dec. 7, 2012, 6 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, filed Apr. 3, 2013, 12 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Aug. 13, 2014, 28 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, filed Nov. 12, 2014, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Dec. 1, 2014, 27 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/804,694, dated Jan. 15, 2015, 23 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 13/804,694, filed May 13, 2015, 12 pages. |
Notice of Allowance received for U.S. Appl. No. 13/804,694, dated Jun. 8, 2015, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 14/204,437, dated May 21, 2015, 13 pages. |
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Sep. 7, 2011, 12 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, filed Dec. 7, 2011, 11 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Feb. 21, 2012, 13 pages. |
Response to Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, filed Apr. 12, 2012, 10 pages. |
Advisory Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Apr. 25, 2012, 3 pages. |
Non Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Oct. 7, 2013, 13 pages. |
Response to Non Final Office Action filed for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, filed Jan. 7, 2014, 10 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated May 2, 2014, 15 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Sep. 11, 2014, 16 pages. |
Final Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/570,628, dated Jul. 10, 2015, 19 pages. |
European Search Report for European Patent Application No. 05257483.7, dated Mar. 31, 2006, 7 pages. |
European Search Report for European Patent Application No. 05257482.9, dated Apr. 3, 2006, 8 pages. |
“BMC Atrium CMDB 7.5.00”, User's Guide, Jan. 2009, 71 pages. |
“BMC Atrium CMDB 7.5.00 Patch 001, Normalization and Reconciliation Guide”, Mar. 2009, 132 pages. |
“BMC Atrium Core 7.6.00; User's Guide”, BMC Software, Sep. 2009, pp. 1-78. |
“BMC Atrium Core 7.6.00; Concepts and Planning Guide”, BMC Software, Sep. 2009, pp. 1-164. |
“BMC Atrium Core 7.6.00; Normalization and Reconciliation Guide”, BMC Software, Sep. 2009, pp. 1-148. |
“Configuration Management Database (CMDB) Federation Specification”, Document No. DSP0252, Jun. 22, 2009. |
“The Four Challenges of Customer-Centric Data Warehousing”, Carleton Corporation, Nov. 1998, pp. 1-14. |
Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/164,524, dated Aug. 25, 2016, 20 pages. |
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/082,194, dated Nov. 18, 2016, 47 pages. |
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/877,332, dated Jul. 14, 2016, 45 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150381419 A1 | Dec 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60633640 | Dec 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11204189 | Aug 2005 | US |
Child | 14851899 | US |