Application Resilience Analysis via Controlled Resource Scarcity

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods lack a satisfactory solution for improving the resilience of applications facing resource scarcity, particularly in shared or virtualized environments where resource saturation can lead to application failures.

Innovation Solution

A device and analysis process that simulate resource scarcity to analyze the behavior of application bricks, diagnose failure causes, and improve resilience by identifying corrective actions to maintain service levels despite resource reductions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If resources are shared between multiple applications to improve resource utilization, then productivity increases, but reliability deteriorates due to resource saturation and application failures

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource utilizationVSAvoidapplication availability
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary resilience testing by proactively injecting resource scarcity scenarios before actual production failures occur. This allows identification of vulnerability thresholds and preventive optimization of application configurations to avoid future failures when resource saturation occurs in shared environments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors application behavior under resource scarcity conditions and provides feedback on resilience metrics. This feedback loop enables dynamic adjustment of resource allocation strategies and application configurations to maintain reliability while maximizing resource utilization in shared environments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If resource scarcity is simulated by applying parasitic load to test application resilience, then reliability assessment is possible, but device complexity increases and test accuracy deteriorates due to indiscriminate resource consumption

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresilience assessmentVSAvoidtesting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments resource types into distinct categories (CPU, memory, storage, network) and applies scarcity scenarios specifically to each resource type independently. This targeted approach replaces indiscriminate parasitic loading with precise, controlled resource constraints, reducing test complexity while improving assessment accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes resource availability parameters directly rather than introducing parasitic load. By controlling resource allocation parameters (e.g., limiting CPU time slices, reducing memory allocation) the system achieves cleaner, more accurate resilience testing without the complexity of simulating competing workloads.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If traditional load testing is used to increase available resources, then productivity improves, but reliability deteriorates because testing does not reflect actual resource saturation behavior

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveapplication performanceVSAvoidresilience accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of testing application behavior under increasing load (traditional approach), the system inverts the approach by testing under decreasing resource availability. This reversal reveals how applications actually behave when resources are saturated, providing accurate reliability assessment that traditional load testing cannot capture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies excessive resource constraints beyond normal operating conditions to expose failure modes and resilience boundaries. By pushing resources to extreme scarcity levels, the system identifies thresholds where applications fail, enabling proactive hardening while maintaining normal productivity under standard conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3620928B1Device and method for analysing the behaviour of an application component subject to increasing scarcity of resources
Publication Date: 2025.04.23 BULL SA
  • EP3620928B1 patent drawingFigure 1A~1B
  • EP3620928B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3620928B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

The invention relates to a device (1) for analyzing the behavior of an application component (2) subjected to resource scarcity, said device comprising a storage module (10), a resource scarcity module (20), configured to generate controlled consumption of at least one critical resource, an injection module (30), configured to subject the IT infrastructure to an application load representative of the operation of the application component (2), a metrics collection module (40), configured to measure the consumption of IT infrastructure resources (4) and/or the service levels of the application component (2), a failure detection module (50), configured to compare predetermined thresholds with measured values;and an application performance management module (60), configured to analyze the behavior of the application component and generate failure data capable of providing information on the nature and/or source of the failure.