Attribute–value pair

Abstract: In one aspect, a method to replicate a key-value pair includes intercepting a command to update a key-value pair in a key-value pair database, the key-value database comprising metadata of a virtual volume, sending an updated key-value pair to a data protection appliance, receiving an acknowledgement that the data protection appliance received the updated key-value pair and updating the key-value pair in the key-value database after the acknowledgement is received.

Abstract: The present invention is a method of storing, retrieving, and modifying data in a database by creating data records in a user-definable language representation, where each data record has an identifier, where each data record includes data fields and attribute fields, where each data field and attribute field is identified by a name, and where the name does not have to be used by another user; storing each data field and attribute field on a separate line in a data item table along with the data record identifier, the field name or attribute name, and a language representation identifier; retrieving the data record, data field or attribute field in the language representation used to store the same; and modifying, adding, or deleting the data record, the data field, or the attribute field using a user-definable language representation, where the language representation may be different from the language representation used to store the item.

Abstract: Event data (e.g., log messages) are represented as sets of attribute/value pairs. An index maps each attribute/value pair or attribute/value tuple to a pointer that points to event data which contains the attribute/value pair or attribute/value tuple. An attribute co-occurrence map or matrix can be generated that includes attribute names that co-occur together. Queries and custom reports can be generated by projecting event data into one or more attributes or attribute/value pairs, and then determining statistics on other attributes using a combination of the inverted index, the attribute co-occurrence map or matrix, operations on sets and/or math and statistical functions.

Abstract: This study compares the performances of pair development (an approach in which a pair of developers jointly work on the same piece of code), solo development, and mixed development under two separate objectives: effort minimization and time minimization. To this end, we develop analytical models to optimize module-developer assignments in each of these approaches. These models are shown to be strongly NP-hard and solved using a genetic algorithm. The solo and pair development approaches are compared for a variety of problem instances to highlight project characteristics that favor one of the two practices. We also propose a simple criterion that can reliably recommend the appropriate approach for a given problem instance. Typically, for efficient knowledge sharing between developers or for highly connected systems, the pair programming approach is preferable. Also, the pair approach is better at leveraging expertise by pairing experts with less skilled partners. Solo programming is usually desirable if the system is large or the effort needed either to form a pair or to code efficiently in pairs is high. Solo programming is also appropriate for projects with a tight deadline, whereas the reverse is true for projects with a lenient deadline. The mixed approach (i.e., an approach where both the solo and pair practices are used in the same project) is only indicated when the system consists of groups of modules that are sufficiently different from one another.