Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ARC patent

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,Nicolai Tufar <ntufar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Ismail Teppeev <iteppeev(at)gmail(dot)com>,John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>,Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>,Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Date: 2005-01-18 00:08:43
Message-ID: 1106006923.14384.234.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 18:51 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> 
> >So, it also seems clear that 8.0.x should eventually have a straight
> >upgrade path to a replacement, assuming the patent is granted. 
> >
> >We should therefore plan to:
> >1. improve/replace ARC for 8.1
> >2. backport any replacement directly onto 8.0STABLE as soon as any
> >patent is granted
> >

> One of the reasons for Postgres' well deserved reputation for stability 
> and reliability is that stable branches are ... stable. Backporting a 
> large item like cache replacement mechanism doesn't seem to fit that too 
> well. I wouldn't want to do that except as a complete last resort.

I agree... but I see no alternative to my point (2) though; I would
welcome additional options.

-- 
Best Regards, Simon Riggs


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2005-01-18 00:45:45
Subject: Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2005-01-18 00:02:30
Subject: Re: ARC patent

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group