A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document of the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
The following applications are cross-referenced and incorporated herein by reference:
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,552 filed Apr. 1, 2003, to Mike Blevins et al. and entitled, “COLLABORATIVE BUSINESS PLUG-IN FRAMEWORK”;
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,684 filed Apr. 1, 2003, to Mike Blevins et al. and entitled, “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR BUSINESS PROCESS PLUG-IN DEVELOPMENT”; and
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,666 filed Apr. 1, 2003, to David Wiser et al. and entitled “Single Servlets for B2B Message Routing.”
The present invention relates to the storage of large messages in a computer system or on a computer network.
Existing integration and messaging systems have problems handling large messages. Incoming messages are read into memory in their entirety, such that when a number of large messages are received a system can crash due to a lack of available memory. Some systems try to prevent these problems by limiting the size of messages that can be processed through a system, but this approach is undesirable to users needing to send messages that may occasionally exceed that limitation.
Another existing approach utilizes in-database persistence and in-memory caching on a hub. Persistence saves enough data for recovery purposes, and caching allows messages to be serialized to a Java Message Service (JMS). This allows JMS to enqueue faster, and allows a JMS dequeue to request the message from a cache without having to redo expensive operations like deserialization, decryption, and XML parsing. The problem still exists in that it is necessary to read an entire message into memory in order to process the message.
Systems and methods in accordance with embodiments of the present invention can overcome deficiencies in existing messaging systems by changing the way in which messages are processed and stored. An integration component can receive an incoming message, such as from a Web server. The integration component can separate the message into an “envelope” portion, which can contain information such as headers, protocols, and addresses, and a “payload” portion, which can contain items such as file attachments. The integration component can write the envelope portion to local memory, and can write the payload portion to at least one persistent store. A pointer can be placed in the envelope to identify the location of the payload in the persistent store. Applications can then use the envelope to locate the payload in a persistent store.
An integration component can also process a message incrementally. The integration component can process portions of the message until the payload portion is reached. The integration component can then stop processing the message, but can continue to read the message in increments and write those increments to a persistent store. Parsers such as MIME parsers and XML parsers can be used by the integration component to process the message. Alternatively, the integration component can process the message as a stream, or at least write the payload portion to the persistent store as a stream.
Other features, aspects, and objects of the invention can be obtained from a review of the specification, the figures, and the claims.
In systems and methods in accordance with embodiments of the present invention, “large” messages, such as large business messages in XML format, an be processed in a Web server or integration application. These business messages can be Java Message Service (JMS) messages, for example, which can utilize distributed destinations in a cluster. A large business message can be any message that may have an attachment or a large amount of text, for example, which can have an overall message size of at or above 1 MB, at or above 10 MB, at or above 50 MB, or even at or above 100 MB. For example, company A can send a message to company B that has a file size of 100 MB. The integration system receiving that message will have to process and resend the entire message. In existing systems, it is necessary to read the entire message into memory before writing the message to disk. The read and write are each done in one complete step. Present systems also have to parse the entire message.
As shown in
Continuing with the example, company B 110 can be working with an integration application. When the message arrives at the Web server 102 for company B 110, the message can arrive on a socket on the network. Portions of the message can be stored somewhat directly to the persistent message store 108 instead of being read entirely into local memory 106. One way to do this is to read the message in increments, or small portions, and write those small portions to storage. For example, the 100 MB message could have a 4 MB portion read into local memory 106, then have that 4 MB portion written to persistent storage 108. Then another 4 MB portion could be read into local memory and written to persistent storage. This process could continue until the entire body portion of the message is in persistent storage 108. Although portions of the entire message may be in memory at one point or another, there would only be up to 4 MB of the message in local memory at any given time. The user can configure the persistent store 108 so that the message is sent to a file or to a database, for example. The portion size can be any size appropriate for the size of the message or the capacity of the system, such as portions of 1 MB, 5 MB, or 10 MB. The portion size can also be a percentage of the overall file size, such as 1%, 5%, 10%, or 25%, for example.
When a message is processed using an integration application or integration server, for example, the message can use a storage method referred to herein as “envelope plus payload.” The message can be processed in the server to separate the contents to be placed in the “envelope” from contents to be placed in the “payload.” This is shown, for example, in the diagram of
Since a message can contain a body with multiple parts, the payload can be designed to contain multiple parts as well. While processing a message in the server, however, only the envelope may be needed. The payload can belong to the user of a B2B server, for example, or an application riding on top of an integration server. The payload can be stored to persistent storage, so that the full payload is never stored in memory. A server or any application can simply deal with the envelope, which can contain pointers to the payload. When an application wants to access any portion of the message, the application can view information contained in the envelope, which can include identification information for the payload parts.
An application can use any pointers in an envelope to extract portions of the body of the message stored in the payload. As the application can retrieve the data from this persistence store, it is not necessary to accumulate everything in local memory on the integration server. A message envelope can contain a pointer to the body of the message, whether there is a single message body or a number of portions, or can contain a pointer for each portion of the body in persistent storage. The number of portions can include a number of attachments, for example. It is not necessary for the integration system to process the attachments to a message, so the system can simply write the attachments to storage, either all together in one block of memory or individually. The pointer can point to the location at which a portion of the message body begins in memory, or can point to the boundaries of a given body portion in memory, for example.
An envelope can contain other useful information about a message, such as the address of the sender and/or the address of the recipient. Each of these addresses can each be a URL, for example. The envelope can also contain the protocol of the message and possibly the protocol of any body portion, if applicable. The envelope can contain message text. The envelope can also contain information about each attachment in the body, such as title, file type, and historical information.
At least two levels of parsing can be used to process a message. A low-level parsing mechanism can be used to decode transfer protocols such as MIME or UUENCODE. The low-level parser can receive the byte stream and identify the parts of the message, such as a text portion and a binary attachment. A second level of parsing, such as XML parsing, can be used to read headers and body portions, which can be in XML or another appropriate messaging or mark-up language.
A message can arrive from the Internet, for example, and can pass through the Web server into an integration transport layer. First, the message can pass through a MIME parser. Second, the message can be decoded using a second processing layer to determine the appropriate business protocol. The envelope can be created in this transport layer. In the decoding process, which can use the XML parser, the envelope can be filled with headers and other appropriate information. After the headers, a pointer can be placed in the envelope and the MIME parser can stop parsing the message. The MIME parser can know to stop parsing when it hits attachments, for example.
The remainder of the message, which can include at least a portion of the body and any attachments, can then be written directly to persistent storage, either in small data “dumps” or on a data stream. Once the entire message is processed, such that the envelope and payload are created, an application can determine where the message portions reside using pointers in the message envelope. The envelope can be thought of as an “abstract” of the message. Once a user or application gets this abstract, that user or application can extract any portion of the message that is needed. For instance, if there are three attachments, the user or application can choose to extract one or two of the attachments from the persistent storage. When the user deletes the message, the envelope can be used, such as by an integration server or B2B server, to delete the associated portions in the persistent storage.
The foregoing description of preferred embodiments of the present invention has been provided for the purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and its practical application, thereby enabling others skilled in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments and with various modifications that are suited to the particular use contemplated. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the following claims and their equivalence.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/404,865, filed Apr. 1, 2003, entitled “System and Method for Storing Large Messages” which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/376,773, filed May 1, 2002, entitled “System and Method for Storing Large Messages”, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5469562 | Saether | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5604860 | McLaughlin et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5630131 | Palevich et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5748975 | Van De Vanter | May 1998 | A |
| 5801958 | Dangelo et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5835769 | Jervis et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5836014 | Faiman | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5862327 | Kwang et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5867822 | Sankar | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5933838 | Lomet | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5944794 | Okamoto et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5950010 | Hesse et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5966535 | Benedikt et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6012083 | Savitzky et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6016495 | McKeehan et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6018730 | Nichols et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6023578 | Birsan et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6023722 | Colyer | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6028997 | Leymann et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6029000 | Woolsey et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6044217 | Brealey et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6067548 | Cheng | May 2000 | A |
| 6067623 | Blakely et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6070184 | Blount et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6085030 | Whitehead et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6092102 | Wagner | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6119149 | Notani | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6141686 | Jackowski et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6141701 | Whitney | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6189044 | Thompson | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6212546 | Starkovich et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6222533 | Notani et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6226675 | Meltzer et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6230287 | Pinard et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6230309 | Turner et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6237135 | Timbol | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6243737 | Flanagan et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6282711 | Halpern et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6292932 | Baisley et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6311327 | O'Brien et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6324681 | Sebesta et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6330569 | Baisley et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6334114 | Jacobs et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6336122 | Lee et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6343265 | Glebov et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6345283 | Anderson | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6348970 | Marx | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6349408 | Smith | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6353923 | Bogle et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6360221 | Gough | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6360358 | Elsbree et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6377939 | Young | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6393605 | Loomans | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6408311 | Baisley et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6411698 | Bauer et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6445711 | Scheel et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6463503 | Jones et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6470364 | Prinzing | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6516322 | Meredith | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6549949 | Bowman-Amuah | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6560769 | Moore et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6567738 | Gopp et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
| 6584454 | Hummel et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6594693 | Borwankar | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6594700 | Graham et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6601113 | Koistinen et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6609115 | Mehring et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6615258 | Barry et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6636491 | Kari et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6637020 | Hammond | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6643652 | Helgeson et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6654932 | Bahrs et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6678518 | Eerola | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6684388 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6687702 | Vaitheeswaran et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6687848 | Najmi | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6721779 | Maffeis | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6732237 | Jacobs et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6748420 | Quatrano et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6754884 | Lucas et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6757689 | Battas et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6789054 | Makhlouf | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6799718 | Chan et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6804686 | Stone et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6823495 | Vedula et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6832238 | Sharma et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6836883 | Abrams et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6847981 | Song et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6850979 | Saulpaugh et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6874143 | Murray et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6889244 | Gaither et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6915519 | Williamson et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6918084 | Slaughter et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 6950872 | Todd, II | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6959307 | Apte | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6963914 | Breitbart et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6971096 | Ankireddipally et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6976086 | Sadeghi et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 7000219 | Barrett et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7017146 | Dellarocas et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7043722 | Bau, III | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7051072 | Stewart et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7051316 | Charisius et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7054858 | Sutherland | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7062718 | Kodosky et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7069507 | Alcazar et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7072934 | Helgeson et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7076772 | Zatloukal | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7096422 | Rothschiller et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7107578 | Alpern | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7111243 | Ballard et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7117504 | Smith et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7127704 | Van De Vanter et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7143186 | Stewart et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7184967 | Mital et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7240331 | Vion-Dury et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 20010016880 | Cai et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010032263 | Gopal et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20020004848 | Sudarshan et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010781 | Tuatini | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010803 | Oberstein et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020016759 | Marcready et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020035604 | Cohen et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073080 | Lipkin | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073236 | Helgeson et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073396 | Crupi et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083075 | Brummel et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111922 | Young et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120685 | Srivastava et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143960 | Goren et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152106 | Stoxen et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161826 | Arteaga et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020165936 | Alston et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174178 | Stawikowski | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174241 | Beged-Dov et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184145 | Sijacic et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184610 | Chong et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194244 | Raventos | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194267 | Flesner et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194495 | Gladstone et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030004746 | Kheirolomoom et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030005181 | Bau et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030014439 | Boughannam | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018661 | Darugar | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018665 | Dovin et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018832 | Amirisetty et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028579 | Kulkarni et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030043191 | Tinsley et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046266 | Mullins et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046591 | Asghari-Kamrani et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030051066 | Pace et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055868 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055878 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074217 | Beisiegel et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074467 | Oblak et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030079029 | Garimella et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084203 | Yoshida et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110117 | Saidenberg et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110446 | Nemer | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030126136 | Omoigui | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149791 | Kane et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030167358 | Marvin et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030196168 | Hu | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204559 | Nguyen | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030233631 | Curry et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040019645 | Goodman et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040040011 | Bosworth et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040068568 | Griffin et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078373 | Ghoneimy et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133660 | Junghuber et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040148336 | Hubbard et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040204976 | Oyama et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040216086 | Bau | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225995 | Marvin et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260715 | Mongeon et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050050068 | Vaschillo et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050278585 | Spencer | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060206856 | Breeden et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060234678 | Juitt et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20070038500 | Hammitt et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| WO9923558 | May 1999 | WO |
| 0190884 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20070198467 A1 | Aug 2007 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60376773 | May 2002 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 10404865 | Apr 2003 | US |
| Child | 11740192 | US |