Decoupled Business Event Processing System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing business transaction infrastructure experiences latency and underutilization of resources due to linear processing and tight coupling, which limits the ability to take advantage of modern multiprocessing architectures, leading to reluctance to address infrastructure issues with hardware upgrades.

Innovation Solution

A business event processing system with a decoupled architecture comprising a producer interface, transport interface, and consumer interface that generates, manages, and processes events in a multithreaded and asynchronous manner, allowing concurrent processing and efficient resource utilization.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If directives are queued and sequentially processed in a synchronized fashion, then processing stability is maintained, but latency increases and resource utilization decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing stabilityVSAvoidlatency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The processing system is segmented into multiple independent threads that can process events concurrently. Each thread handles specific processing tasks independently, allowing parallel execution without synchronization overhead, thereby reducing latency while maintaining stability through structured thread management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from static sequential processing to dynamic concurrent processing. Threads are created and managed dynamically to handle events as they arrive, allowing the system to adapt to varying load conditions and optimize processing speed without compromising stability through proper thread coordination mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Device complexity

If directives are processed sequentially in a single thread, then system simplicity is maintained, but productivity is limited and resources remain idle

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoidprocessing throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The processing workload is divided into multiple segments handled by separate threads. This segmentation enables concurrent processing of events, significantly improving productivity while keeping each individual thread relatively simple in structure, thus achieving high throughput without excessive complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Multiple processing threads are merged into a unified event processing architecture where threads share common resources and coordinate through shared event queues. This merging approach improves productivity through parallel processing while maintaining overall system simplicity through unified architecture and shared data structures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Ease of manufacture

If the processing flow is tightly coupled, then implementation simplicity is maintained, but adaptability decreases and infrastructure changes require extensive modifications

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveimplementation simplicityVSAvoidprocessing flow flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The tightly coupled processing flow is segmented into independent modular components represented by separate threads and event handlers. Each module can be independently modified or replaced without affecting the entire system, significantly improving adaptability while maintaining implementation simplicity through standardized interface definitions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

An event-driven intermediary layer is introduced between different processing components. This intermediary uses event queues and message passing to decouple components, allowing flexible reconfiguration of processing flows while maintaining implementation simplicity through standardized event interfaces and protocols.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Productivity

If additional hardware resources are added to address latency and load problems, then processing capacity increases, but cost increases and existing hardware underutilization is not resolved

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing capacityVSAvoidhardware resources
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses dynamic thread creation and management to optimize resource utilization. Threads are spawned and terminated dynamically based on event arrival rates and processing requirements, allowing the system to achieve high processing capacity using existing hardware resources efficiently without requiring additional hardware investments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes operational parameters by transitioning from sequential to concurrent processing modes. By adjusting thread management parameters and processing priorities, the system achieves increased processing capacity through software optimization rather than hardware expansion, fully utilizing existing resources.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS7779421B2Business event processing
Publication Date: 2010.08.17 EBAY INC
  • US7779421B2 patent drawing
  • US7779421B2 patent drawing
  • US7779421B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Techniques for business event processing are presented. Producer services produce events that are managed and distributed by a transport service. Consumer services acquire events from the transport service and perform actions in response to the events. The production, distribution, and processing of the events and actions may be asynchronously and concurrently performed.