Proactive Software Framework Monitoring via Load Testing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Complex software application frameworks pose challenges in proactive monitoring due to their large, interdependent services and microservices, making it difficult to detect system failures before they occur, which is crucial for maintaining reliability and operational integrity.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of proactive load testing experiments defined by load increase action, steady state detection, and fault inducement action data, allowing for simulated usage load scenarios and fault induction to assess the resilience of software application frameworks.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional monitoring methods are used on complex software application frameworks, then the monitoring coverage is limited, but the system complexity and difficulty of detecting system failures increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem failure detection capabilityVSAvoidsoftware application framework complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by performing load testing experiments and fault induction before actual system failures occur in production. The system proactively identifies potential failure modes by simulating various fault conditions and measuring system resilience, allowing teams to address issues before they impact real users. This is embodied in the proactive monitoring approach that continuously assesses system health through controlled experiments rather than waiting for failures to manifest.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses copying by creating virtual replicas of the software application framework for testing purposes. Instead of monitoring the single production system directly, the invention creates copy environments where fault induction experiments can be safely performed. These copies mirror the production system's architecture and behavior, allowing realistic failure scenario testing without risking actual service disruption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If proactive load testing experiments are implemented, then the reliability and resilience assessment improves, but the computational resources and time required for monitoring increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesoftware resilience assessment accuracyVSAvoidmonitoring experiment execution time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements periodic action by scheduling load testing experiments to run at regular intervals or triggered by specific events rather than continuously. The system performs resilience assessments periodically, allowing the software application framework to operate normally between tests. This approach balances the need for accurate resilience data with the constraint of available testing time, executing comprehensive experiments only when necessary to maintain reliable operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by selecting specific fault scenarios and load conditions for testing rather than exhaustively testing all possible failure modes. The system identifies the most critical failure scenarios based on historical data and risk assessment, then focuses testing resources on those specific cases. This allows for efficient resilience assessment without requiring complete coverage of every possible system state, reducing overall testing time while maintaining assessment accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Loss of information

If fault induction operations are performed to assess resilience, then the predictive insights into system behavior improve, but the operational stability during testing may deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem behavior insight qualityVSAvoidsystem operational stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the software application framework into isolated testable components or services. When fault induction is performed, only specific segments are affected while the rest of the system continues to operate normally. This allows for targeted resilience testing of individual services or modules without causing system-wide disruption. The segmented approach enables controlled fault injection that provides detailed behavioral insights while maintaining overall system stability through compartmentalization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS11748242B2Proactive monitoring of a software application framework
Publication Date: 2023.09.05 ATLASSIAN PTY LTD
  • US11748242B2 patent drawing
  • US11748242B2 patent drawing
  • US11748242B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods provide techniques for more effective and efficient proactive monitoring of a target software application framework. In response, embodiments of the present invention provide methods, apparatuses, systems, computing devices, and/or the like that are configured to enable effective and efficient proactive monitoring of a target software application framework using a load testing experiment definition data object, wherein the load testing experiment definition data object describes a load increase action definition, a steady state definition, and a fault inducement action definition.