Deployment Manager Feedback for Restoring Goal System States

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing data processing systems face challenges in maintaining their system state after incidents, as remediation often deviates from the desired goal state, affecting the ability to provide computer-implemented services.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for managing data processing systems by identifying and restoring the system state to a goal state through comparison and remedial actions, using deployment manager to track and remediate deviations, and documenting successful actions for future reference.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If remediation actions are performed to resolve incidents, then the impact of the incident is resolved, but the system state may deviate from the goal state

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveincident resolutionVSAvoidsystem state accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically compares the current system state against the goal state after remediation actions and identifies deviations. This feedback mechanism enables the system to detect when remediation has successfully resolved the incident while maintaining accurate system state, and to identify when additional actions are needed to restore the goal state.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary comparison of system state against goal state before finalizing remediation. By anticipating potential deviations and preparing corrective actions in advance, the system ensures that remediation actions lead to the desired goal state rather than creating new deviations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If manual monitoring of system state is performed, then system state can be verified, but operational complexity and time consumption increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem state verificationVSAvoidoperational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically monitors and compares its own system state against the goal state without requiring manual intervention. The deployment manager performs self-verification by enumerating processes and configurations, comparing them to the goal state, and identifying deviations autonomously. This eliminates the need for manual monitoring while maintaining precise system state verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical monitoring processes with automated computational comparison. Instead of human operators manually checking system states, the system uses automated enumeration of processes and configurations, comparison algorithms, and computational analysis to verify system state accuracy, thereby reducing operational complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Manufacturing precision

If comprehensive system state comparison is performed, then all deviations can be identified, but processing time and computational resources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeviation detection accuracyVSAvoidremediation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the system state into distinct components such as processes, configurations, and other system elements. The deployment manager enumerates these segments separately and compares each against the corresponding goal state components, allowing for targeted deviation detection without requiring exhaustive analysis of the entire system state at once.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs comparison actions on critical system components and configurations that are most likely to deviate after remediation, rather than uniformly analyzing all possible system states. This selective approach identifies meaningful deviations efficiently while avoiding unnecessary computational resources spent on comparing stable system elements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS12602306B2Restoration of system states in data processing systems
Publication Date: 2026.04.14 DELL PROD LP
  • US12602306B2 patent drawing
  • US12602306B2 patent drawing
  • US12602306B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods and systems for managing data processing systems are disclosed. The data processing systems may be managed by restoring the system states in the data processing systems. The system states may be restored in the data processing systems by remediating configurations and/or processes after incidents are resolved. The configurations and/or processes may be changed by remediation of incidents in data processing systems. Restoration of a system state to a goal state may require implementation of action items in the data processing system. The action items that yield restoration of the system state may be stored in a repository for future use.