API Retry Handling via Visual Flow Designer Policies

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In cloud computing environments, managing and handling increasing amounts of data becomes challenging due to the complexity of analyzing, interacting with, and providing reports for vast data resources, particularly when dealing with third-party systems, where current retry mechanisms are inadequate for efficient error handling.

Innovation Solution

The development of custom retry mechanisms with visual, natural language-based development tools, such as the Flow Designer system, which allows for the creation of custom retry policies to handle various error conditions, improving automated processes by enabling users to specify when and how retries should occur, including options like interval or exponential backoff.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If standard retry mechanisms are used for API error handling, then basic error recovery is achieved, but the system cannot efficiently handle increasing amounts of data and complex error conditions in cloud computing environments

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveerror handling capabilityVSAvoidhandling of complex error conditions

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The retry mechanism transitions from static, fixed retry logic to dynamic, configurable retry policies that can adapt to different error conditions, data volumes, and system states. The system allows runtime modification of retry parameters and selection of different retry strategies based on the specific error encountered.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The invention introduces multiple configurable parameters for retry behavior including retry intervals, maximum retry counts, backoff strategies, and error type-specific settings. These parameters can be adjusted dynamically to optimize error handling for different scenarios and data volumes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If custom retry policies are implemented to handle various error conditions, then error handling versatility improves, but the complexity of creating and managing retry mechanisms increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecustom retry policy flexibilityVSAvoidretry mechanism complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables non-technical users to create and configure custom retry policies through a visual interface without requiring programming knowledge. The Flow Designer automatically generates the necessary retry logic and error handling code based on user-selected options, eliminating the need for manual coding and reducing complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The Flow Designer acts as an intermediary layer between the user and the complex retry mechanism implementation. It provides a simplified visual interface that translates user-friendly selections into sophisticated retry policies, shielding users from the underlying complexity while delivering advanced error handling capabilities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Ease of operation

If visual Flow Designer tools are used for creating retry mechanisms, then ease of operation improves, but the system requires additional development tools and infrastructure

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvevisual tool usabilityVSAvoidsystem infrastructure

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The Flow Designer is integrated directly into the cloud computing platform, combining the visual development tool with the execution environment. This integration eliminates the need for separate development and deployment systems, allowing users to create, test, and deploy retry policies within a unified platform.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Productivity

If automated retry processes are implemented, then productivity improves, but downtime may occur during error recovery periods

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveautomated process efficiencyVSAvoiddowntime during retry

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The retry mechanism uses periodic retry attempts with configurable intervals rather than continuous retry loops. This allows the system to pause between retry attempts, reducing resource consumption and minimizing the impact on overall system productivity while still achieving error recovery.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary error assessment and selects appropriate retry strategies before executing retry attempts. This preliminary action optimizes the retry process by avoiding unnecessary retry attempts and selecting the most efficient recovery path, thereby reducing downtime.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11442899B2Systems and methods for improved application programing interface (API) retry handling

Publication Date: 2022.09.13 SERVICENOW INC

AI summary

A computing system includes a server. The server is communicatively coupled to a data repository and is configured to store a data in the data repository. The server is further configured to create, via a visual information flow creation tool, at least one information flow object. The server is additionally configured to create, via a retry handling policy system, a retry policy, wherein the retry policy comprises a retry condition and a retry strategy, and to enable the at least one information flow object to follow the retry strategy when the retry condition occurs.