Distributed Constraint Enforcement for Data Synchronization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing synchronization systems face challenges in managing constraints effectively, leading to false conflict scenarios and increased computational load on central nodes, which can result in unmanageable situations and user confusion.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a mesh operating environment (MOE) that uses tags (etags) to track syncs across member devices, allowing for automatic and localized resolution of conflicts by comparing meta-data between devices and the central node, thereby reducing the need for user intervention and minimizing central node interactions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If constraint management is imposed in a synchronization environment master component (central node), then synchronization order among member computing devices is maintained, but the flexibility of the environment is limited and computational power at the central node is consumed

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesynchronization orderVSAvoidcentral node computational burden

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments constraint management functionality from the central node to individual member computing devices. Each device independently evaluates constraints against its own data entries and downloaded data entries, rather than relying on centralized constraint enforcement. This distribution of computational tasks reduces the central node's burden while maintaining synchronization integrity through localized constraint checking.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Member computing devices perform self-service by autonomously evaluating synchronization constraints against their local data and comparing it with downloaded data. The devices independently identify and resolve false conflicts without requiring central node intervention for constraint management, thereby reducing computational overhead at the central node while maintaining reliable synchronization order.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

2Productivity

If automated resolution of constraints is implemented, then conflict resolution speed is improved, but additional violations may be generated that can spiral into an unmanageable situation

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveconflict resolution speedVSAvoidconstraint violation management

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms where member devices continuously monitor and evaluate constraint violations against their local state and downloaded data. When false conflicts are detected through constraint evaluation, the system provides feedback to automatically resolve them by determining whether violations stem from genuine conflicts or synchronization artifacts. This closed-loop approach prevents automated resolution from generating unmanageable violation spirals by continuously verifying constraint satisfaction.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary constraint evaluation before finalizing synchronization operations. By checking constraints against both local and downloaded data entries in advance, the system identifies potential false conflicts early and resolves them proactively, preventing the accumulation of unmanageable violations while maintaining fast automated resolution.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

3Device complexity

If constraint management is centralized at the master component, then synchronization control is simplified, but user flexibility is reduced and user confusion increases due to false violation scenarios

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveconstraint management structureVSAvoiduser flexibility

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments constraint management from centralized control to distributed evaluation at each member device. This allows users to maintain flexibility in their local synchronization environments while still achieving reliable synchronization. Each device independently evaluates constraints, reducing false violation scenarios that cause user confusion while preserving user control and flexibility.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Member computing devices autonomously evaluate constraints and resolve false conflicts without requiring centralized intervention. This self-service approach reduces user confusion by eliminating spurious violation notifications while maintaining user flexibility in managing their own synchronization preferences and configurations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS10931748B2Optimistic concurrency utilizing distributed constraint enforcement

Publication Date: 2021.02.23 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC

AI summary

Optimistic concurrency is effectuated to manage constraints in a synchronization environment at multiple computing device endpoints in a consistent fashion without utilizing concentrated centralized constraint logic. Implemented data synchronization constraints that identify false violation scenarios may be automatically resolved without user intervention by using an etag system directed by a master component to assist computing device endpoints to maintain data synchronization among them. Data entries defining each file hierarchy component to be synched are generated and shared with the master component and each computing device endpoint in a synchronization environment. Individual computing device endpoints can use the data entries generated locally with those generated by other computing device endpoints to locally resolve identified false violation scenarios.