Abstract:
Embodiments of the claimed subject matter are directed to methods and a system that allows the optimization of processes operating on a multi-platform system (such as a mainframe) by migrating certain processes operating on one platform to another platform in the system. In one embodiment, optimization is performed by evaluating the processes executing in a partition operating under a proprietary operating system, determining a collection of processes from the processes to be migrated, calculating a cost of migration for migrating the collection of processes, prioritizing the collection of processes in an order of migration and incrementally migrating the processes according to the order of migration to another partition in the mainframe executing a lower cost (e.g., open-source) operating system.

Description:
CLAIM OF PRIORITY 
     This application is a continuation (and claims the benefit of priority under 35 USC 120) of U.S. application Ser. No. 12/651,876, filed Jan. 4, 2010, now allowed, which claims priority to provisional patent application entitled “Optimizing A Distribution of Applications Operating In A Multiple Environment System,” U.S. Application Ser. No. 61/177,149 filed on May 11, 2009. Both of these prior applications are incorporated by reference in their entirety. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND 
     Mainframes are computing systems used mainly by large businesses and organizations for executing mission and task-critical applications (such as bulk data processing) that are often essential to the core of the business or organization. These applications often provide a competitive advantage to the organization, and thus mainframes are designed for the purposes of longevity, fault tolerance, and durability. 
     In addition, mainframes also offer vastly increased computing performance relative to ordinary person computers. Compared to a personal computer such as a PC, mainframes will commonly have hundreds to thousands of times as much data storage, and the capability to access, manipulate, and perform operations on such data much faster. Mainframes are designed to handle very high volumes of input and output (I/O) and emphasize throughput computing. Traditionally, mainframe designs have included several subsidiary computers (called channels or peripheral processors) which manage the I/O devices, leaving the central processing unit (CPU) free to deal only with high-speed memory. In addition, typical mainframe applications are often used to perform tasks which are essential to the core of the business operating the mainframe. 
     In addition, nearly all conventional mainframes also have the ability to run (or host) multiple operating systems, and thereby operate not as a single computer but as a number of virtual machines. This is most commonly achieved through the use of multiple logical partitions. Each logical partition, commonly referred to as a “LPAR,” is a subset of a computing system&#39;s hardware resources that is virtualized as a separate computer. In this role, a single mainframe can replace dozens or even hundreds of smaller servers. As a general practice, mainframes often utilize the proprietary operating system of the mainframe&#39;s manufacturer, and conventional implementations may comprise a single mainframe operating numerous instances of the same operating system. Recent developments have enabled the combination of various, disparate operating systems operating in distributed logical partitions in the same mainframe. 
     Unfortunately, mainframes are typically very expensive to purchase and procure. Moreover, mainframe operating systems and applications can also be very expensive to develop and/or license. Due to the relatively small number of mainframe manufacturers and software developers, mainframe consumers typically have few options beyond a mainframe manufacturer&#39;s proprietary operating system. Naturally, reliance on a single, proprietary operating system can be expensive and licensing fees for the proprietary operating system can contribute significantly to the cost of owning and operating a mainframe, as well as purchasing mainframe computing services. Moreover, these fees are almost certain to continue to grow for a mainframe consumer due to maintenance and upgrade fees. An alternative to actual ownership of mainframes is to rent mainframe computing services from a mainframe service provider. However, a service purchasing arrangement with these providers (which can be the mainframe manufacturers themselves) can often be just as expensive over time. 
     Unfortunately, limiting the cost of mainframe ownership and operation is difficult to achieve. Conventional approaches in response to this problem include: continuing operation under a status quo paradigm; transferring operation of the processes in the system to alternate platforms; purchasing additional software and hardware packages; and tactically managing the additional costs. However, these approaches each suffer from significant flaws. The approach of operating under a status quo paradigm will be unlikely to limit the increasing cost of mainframe ownership and operation, as dependency on commercial mainframe manufacturers and software developers persists. 
     Transferring operation of the processes in the system to alternate platforms consists of taking processes operating in the current platform and moving the operation of the application to an alternate platform. For example, the business or organization&#39;s proprietary applications that provide the competitive advantage may be moved to other platforms (such as servers). However, transferring operation of the processes in a system to alternate platforms can be risky and may result in additional delays, inconsistent results and unpredictable behavior. Moreover, alternate platforms may result in waste, may be similarly costly, and may require significant additional capital expenditure. In addition, use of these alternative platforms can preclude the ability to offload certain processes to other resident, specialized processors capable of faster and/or concurrent processing 
     Purchasing additional third party software is another approach to limiting the cost (e.g., eliminating the cost of developing proprietary software). However, this approach also eliminates the competitive advantages of proprietary applications. Moreover, this approach requires additional licensing fees and may not substantially reduce the cost of operation and/or ownership. 
     Tactical management of additional costs typically involves proactively controlling cost increases due to increases in volume, or limiting licensing fees to current implementations. However, this can severely affect an operation&#39;s efficacy if the operation grows, as performance may suffer from obsolete or insufficient resources and applications. Moreover, tactical management is not typically a successful long term solution as costs are not truly reduced, but rather, redistributed (e.g., as a loss in performance). 
     SUMMARY 
     This Summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that is further described below in the Detailed Description. This Summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used to limit the scope of the claimed subject matter. 
     Embodiments of the claimed subject matter are directed to methods and a system that allows the optimization of processes operating on a multi-platform system (such as a mainframe) by migrating certain processes operating on one platform to another platform in the system. In one embodiment, optimization is performed by evaluating the processes executing in a partition operating under a proprietary operating system, determining a collection of processes from the processes to be migrated, calculating a cost of migration for migrating the collection of processes, prioritizing the collection of processes in an order of migration and incrementally migrating the processes according to the order of migration to another partition in the mainframe executing an open-source operating system. 
     In another embodiment, migration of a process executing in a partition operating under a proprietary operating system is performed by identifying processes amenable to migration, duplicating the process in a separate logical partition operating under a low-cost operating system, and testing the execution of the process in the low-cost operating system. 
     In yet another embodiment, a system is provided for optimally migrating processes operating on one platform in a multi-platform system. According to some embodiments, the system includes a mainframe with at least two logical partitions, with at least one platform executing on each of the partitions. Processes executing on one platform is migrated to the other platform to achieve an optimal distribution based on an evaluation of the cost of migration. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and form a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention: 
         FIG. 1  depicts an exemplary conventional distribution of applications in a multi-partition mainframe, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 2  depicts an exemplary distribution of applications in a multi-partition mainframe executing at least two operating systems, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 3  depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems according to a first pre-defined stage, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 4  depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems according to a second pre-defined stage, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 5  depicts an exemplary distribution of processes in a multi-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems after a process migration, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 6  depicts an exemplary flowchart of a process of optimizing the distribution of applications between platforms in a multi-platform system, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
         FIG. 7  depicts an exemplary flowchart of a process of migrating processes between a first platform to a second platform in a multi-platform system, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     Reference will now be made in detail to several embodiments. While the subject matter will be described in conjunction with the alternative embodiments, it will be understood that they are not intended to limit the claimed subject matter to these embodiments. On the contrary, the claimed subject matter is intended to cover alternative, modifications, and equivalents, which may be included within the spirit and scope of the claimed subject matter as defined by the appended claims. 
     Furthermore, in the following detailed description, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the claimed subject matter. However, it will be recognized by one skilled in the art that embodiments may be practiced without these specific details or with equivalents thereof. In other instances, well-known processes, procedures, components, and circuits have not been described in detail as not to unnecessarily obscure aspects and features of the subject matter. 
     Portions of the detailed description that follow are presented and discussed in terms of a process. Although steps and sequencing thereof are disclosed in figures herein (e.g.,  FIGS. 6, 7 ) describing the operations of this process, such steps and sequencing are exemplary. Embodiments are well suited to performing various other steps or variations of the steps recited in the flowchart of the figure herein, and in a sequence other than that depicted and described herein. 
     Some portions of the detailed description are presented in terms of procedures, steps, logic blocks, processing, and other symbolic representations of operations on data bits that can be performed on computer memory. These descriptions and representations are the means used by those skilled in the data processing arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. A procedure, computer-executed step, logic block, process, etc., is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps or instructions leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared, and otherwise manipulated in a computer system. It has proven convenient at times, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers, or the like. 
     It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unless specifically stated otherwise as apparent from the following discussions, it is appreciated that throughout, discussions utilizing terms such as “accessing,” “writing,” “including,” “storing,” “transmitting,” “traversing,” “associating,” “identifying” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system&#39;s registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices. 
     Application Distribution in a Mainframe 
     According to embodiments of the present invention, a system for optimally distributing processes between platforms in a multi-platform system is provided. In one embodiment, a system comprising a plurality of logical partitions, each partition hosting at least one platform and each platform executing one or more processes is provided.  FIG. 1  depicts an exemplary conventional distribution of applications in a multi-partition system  100 , in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. 
     In one embodiment, system  100  may be implemented as, for example, a mainframe computing system. As depicted, system  100  is implemented as a mainframe computing system comprising a plurality of logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-A  101  and LPAR-B  103 ). As presented, each logical partition hosts at least one platform. In one embodiment, the platform is implemented as an operating system (e.g., OS 1   105 ). In further embodiments, these operating systems may be proprietary operating systems licensed by the mainframe&#39;s manufacturer. In a typical configuration, each partition is communicatively coupled via inter-partition communication means such as through a bus or through memory via a protocol (e.g., Hipersockets  107 ). As depicted in  FIG. 1 , system  100  includes hipersockets  107  to facilitate communication between the separate partitions  101 ,  103 . 
     In some embodiments, the system  100  may have a plurality of applications executing in one or more of the system&#39;s partitions  101 ,  103 . In a typical embodiment, these applications may include, but are not limited to, transaction servers  111 , databases  117  and database management applications  113 , network communications software  115 . In some embodiments, for partitions  101 ,  103  hosting the same platform  105 , one or more of the applications running in one partition (e.g., partition  101 ) may also be executed in the same platform  105  hosted on the second partition (e.g., partition  103 ). In still further embodiments, system  100  may also include specialized processors or engines (e.g., processors  109 ) for performing particular tasks only. 
     Alternate Platforms on Additional Logical Partitions 
     In one embodiment, a mainframe or like computing system is configured to execute dissimilar platforms in multiple logical partitions.  FIG. 2  depicts an exemplary distribution of applications in a multi-partition system  200  executing at least two operating systems, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. As presented, system  200  includes the logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-A  101  and LPAR-B  103 ) executing the same platform  105 ; hipersockets  107 ; applications ( 111 ,  113 ,  115 , and  117 ) and specialized processors  109 ; described above with reference to system  100  of  FIG. 1 . In typical configurations, the platforms executing on the logical partitions LPAR-A  101  and LPAR-B  103  may be proprietary operating systems licensed by the mainframe&#39;s manufacturer. However, this may lead to significant and/or excessive operating costs. 
     As shown in  FIG. 2 , the cost of operating additional platforms may be mitigated through the execution of alternate, lower-cost, and non-proprietary platforms. These platforms (e.g., OS 2   207 ) may be executed on additional logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-C  201 , LPAR-D  203 ) in the system  200 . In one embodiment, the platforms may be executed directly as operating systems (e.g., instances of OS 2   207  in LPAR-D  203 ). In alternate embodiments, the platforms may also be instanced as virtual machines (e.g., VM  205  of LPAR-C  201 ). Therefore, by using lower-cost and/or non-proprietary platforms, a mainframe operator or mainframe service consumer may be able to mitigate much of the operational costs due to software licensing that has traditionally been an unavoidable cost of using a mainframe. 
     Application Migration Across Disparate Platforms 
     In some embodiments, the cost of operating a mainframe may be further reduced by migrating pre-executing processes in a higher-cost and/or proprietary platform to a lower-cost and/or non-proprietary platform while balancing costs to efficacy, security, reliability and/or performance. However, not every application executing in a platform may be amenable towards migration. Accordingly, optimizing the balance of applications between each platform can result in significant savings while maintaining or exceeding current levels of performance.  FIG. 3  depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platform system executing at least two operating systems according to a first pre-defined stage  300 , in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. In a typical configuration, system  300  includes multiple logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-A  101 , LPAR-C  201 ); a first platform (e.g., OS 1   105 ) executing on a logical partition (e.g., LPAR-A  101 ); a second platform (e.g., OS 2   207 ) executing on the other logical partition (e.g., LPAR-C  201 ); and a plurality of applications ( 111 ,  117 ,  115 ). 
     As depicted in  FIG. 3 , an application (e.g., application  111 ) executing on the first platform may perform, during execution, a plurality of processes and/or transactions. These processes and transactions may incorporate additional applications executing within and/or without the first platform. In one embodiment, an application and/or a specific process or transaction of an application may be migrated from being executed in the first platform to being executed in the second platform. Migration of a process or transaction may be performed by, for example, duplicating the execution of the target transaction or process in the second platform and temporarily executing the process or transaction in both platforms concurrently. Thus, for example, data used by the process or transaction executing in the first platform may be duplicated and used in the process or transaction executing in the second platform. In one embodiment, the process may be duplicated to have the same source code. In still further embodiments, the process may be structured so that the same data runs through both instances of the process. Alternatively, the process may be structured such that specific instructions may be performed in alternating instances, the instructions delegated by a load processor. As discussed above, communication and data may be transferred between platforms via inter-partition communication means (e.g., hipersockets  107 ). 
     In some embodiments, certain applications are dependent on the specific application or portions of a specific application and may not be easily migrated. In one embodiment, applications with the least amount of dependencies while recouping the highest amount of savings may be prioritized. To determine the viability of migrating an application between platforms, a heuristic may be used to determine the application&#39;s candidacy. In one embodiment, an application&#39;s candidacy may be determined by evaluating the application&#39;s dependencies and relative coupling to the underlying operating system. In still further embodiments, the application&#39;s candidacy may include an estimated savings in computing cost. 
     In one embodiment, computing savings may be determined for a plurality of processes by generating the CPU consumption of an application or process, and parsing the source code for the application or process to determine the number of operands in the source code. The plurality of processes can subsequently prioritized by comparing the respective numbers of operands and CPU consumptions to determine the estimated savings. 
     In one embodiment, the dependencies of the specific applications in a platform may be determined by creating logic flows corresponding to each of the specific applications. The logic flows may be utilized to identify a demarcation of a process to migrate the process on to the other platform without increasing the latency and/or complexity of the operations. 
     In further embodiments, the target transaction or process may be monitored in the second platform to ensure the maintenance of certain standards or metrics (e.g., reliability, performance). In still further embodiments, a primary operation of the process or transaction may be transferred from the first platform to the second platform to increase testing or to complete migration, as desired. In one embodiment, one or more processes, transactions, or even applications may be migrated between platforms. According to these embodiments, the processes, transactions and applications executing in a first platform may be evaluated for suitability of migration. For example, certain applications which are intricately linked to the first platform may be unsuitable for migration, and thus may not be selected for migration. In some embodiments, migration of one or more applications may be performed in pre-defined stages, e.g., to minimize risk to the entire system. As depicted in  FIG. 3 , transaction  1  (e.g., TR 01 ) is migrated between the first platform OS 1   105  and the second platform OS 2   207 . In one embodiment, the first platform (e.g., OS 1   105 ) may be implemented as a proprietary operating system licensed by the mainframe manufacturer. In some embodiments, the second platform (e.g., OS 2   207 ) may be implemented as a lower-cost and/or non proprietary operating system. 
       FIG. 4  depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platform system executing at least two operating systems according to a second pre-defined stage  400 , in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention.  FIG. 4  includes the components of  FIG. 3 , but depicts the migration of additional transactions (e.g., TR 02 , TR 03 ) comprising an application (e.g., application  111 ) from the first platform OS 1   105  to the second platform OS 2   207 . 
       FIG. 5  depicts an exemplary distribution of processes in a multi-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems after a process migration  500 , in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention.  FIG. 5  includes the components of  FIGS. 3 and 4 , and depicts the finalized migration of all of the transactions (e.g., TR 02 , TR 03 , . . . TRNN) comprising the application  111  from the first platform OS 1   105  to the second platform OS 2   207 . Once an application or applications have been successfully migrated from the first platform to one or more other platforms, primary operation of the application may be transferred, and execution of the application in the first platform may be terminated. Thus, in some embodiments, only the transactions or processes intricately linked or specific to the first platform (e.g., assemblers) will remain executing on the first platform after migration is completed. 
     Evaluating Applications for Migration 
     With reference to  FIG. 6 , an exemplary flowchart  600  of a process of optimizing the distribution of applications between platforms in a multi-platform system is depicted, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. In one embodiment, the multi-platform system includes at least one lower-cost platform (e.g., an open source operating system such as Linux). Steps  601 - 615  describe exemplary steps of the flowchart  600  in accordance with the various embodiments herein described. In one embodiment, flowchart  600  is provided to identify which part of an application executing in the system that should be migrated to the lower-cost platform without increasing the risk of the organization or increasing network latency. 
     At step  601 , an evaluation of a process or transaction performed by an application executing in a higher-cost platform for suitability of migration is initiated. Evaluation of a process or transaction may include, for example, selecting a process executing in a higher-cost platform for evaluation. In one embodiment, an application&#39;s candidacy may be determined by evaluating the application&#39;s dependencies and relative coupling to the underlying operating system. In still further embodiments, the application&#39;s candidacy may include an estimated savings in computing cost. 
     At step  603 , whether the process is platform specific is determined. Platform-specificity may include, for example, a high level of dependency on platform resources, rather than total platform specificity. If the process is determined at step  603  to be platform dependent, the process or transaction is not considered a candidate for migration and the process proceeds to step  615 , where another process or transaction is selected for evaluation. However, if the process is determined at step  603  to not be platform specific, the process proceeds to step  605 . 
     At step  605 , a plurality of migration candidates is collected. The migration candidates are collected by aggregating the processes which have been evaluated at step  601  as candidates for migration and also determined at step  603  to not be excessively coupled to the underlying platform or operating system. 
     At step  607 , a cost of migration for each migration candidate in the collection of processes is calculated. The cost of migration may be calculated by, for example, considering the computing savings for the collection of processes by generating the CPU consumption of the particular transaction, application, or process, and parsing the source code for the application or process to determine the number of operands in the source code. The cost plurality of processes can be further calculated by comparing the respective numbers of operands and CPU consumptions to determine the estimated savings. At step  609 , each process, transaction or application may be ordered according to the cost of migration. 
     At step  611 , the migration may be organized into a series of sequential stages to reduce the risk to the system. Finally, at step  613 , the processes may be migrated in compliance with the stages defined at step  611 . 
     Process Migration 
     With reference to  FIG. 7 , an exemplary flowchart  700  of a process of migrating processes between a first platform to a second platform in a multi-platform system is depicted, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention. Steps  701 - 709  describe exemplary steps of the flowchart  700  in accordance with the various embodiments herein described. 
     At step  701 , a selection of processes executing in a first platform is identified for migration to a second platform. In one embodiment, the processes may be identified according to a heuristical evaluation (e.g., steps  601  through  607  of  FIG. 6  described above). At step  703 , the selection of processes identified in step  701  is duplicated in a second, disparate platform at step  703 . Duplication may include, for example, duplicating data used by the process executing in the first platform in the process executing in the second platform. In one embodiment, the process may be duplicated to have the same source code. In still further embodiments, the process may be structured so that the same data runs through both instances of the process. Alternatively, the process may be structured such that specific instructions may be performed in alternating instances, the instructions delegated by a load processor. 
     At step  705 , an execution of the processes in the second platform is tested. Testing may include, for example, monitoring the processes in the second platform, as well as other traditional software testing protocols such as load and fault tolerance. In one embodiment, simulated events may be used to induce specific circumstances. Once testing is completed, primary operation of the process may be transferred to the process executing in the second platform at step  707 . Transfer of the primary operation may include, for example, funneling the actual real time data from the first platform to the process. In some embodiments, the process in the first platform may be terminated at step  709 . 
     Accordingly, significant operational costs may be mitigated in mainframe operation through the use of multiple platforms by optimizing the distribution of processes. This distribution of processes may be accomplished by, for example, evaluating the suitability of migration for one or more processes, duplicating the processes and testing the processes in a second, lower-cost platform. 
     Although the subject matter has been described in language specific to structural features and/or processological acts, it is to be understood that the subject matter defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to the specific features or acts described above. Rather, the specific features and acts described above are disclosed as example forms of implementing the claims.