Re: User locks code

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
Cc: Massimo Dal Zotto <dz(at)cs(dot)unitn(dot)it>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: User locks code
Date: 2001-08-23 23:04:28
Message-ID: 200108232304.f7NN4SP21403@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > For example, one could use user-locks for processing incoming
> > > orders by multiple operators:
> > > select * from orders where user_lock(orders.oid) = 1 LIMIT 1
> > > - so each operator would lock one order for processing and
> > > operators wouldn't block each other. So, could such
> > > application be commercial with current licence of
> > > user_lock()? (Sorry, I'm not licence guru.)
> >
> > I assume any code that uses contrib/userlock has to be GPL'ed,
> > meaning it can be used for commercial purposes but can't be sold
> > as binary-only, and actually can't be sold for much because you
> > have to make the code available for near-zero cost.
>
> I'm talking not about solding contrib/userlock separately, but
> about ability to sold applications which use contrib/userlock.
> Sorry, if it was not clear.

No, you were clear. My assumption is that once you link that code into
the backend, the entire backend is GPL'ed and any other application code
you link into it is also (stored procedures, triggers, etc.) I don't
think your client application will be GPL'ed, assuming you didn't link
in libreadline.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mikheev, Vadim 2001-08-23 23:24:39 RE: User locks code
Previous Message Mikheev, Vadim 2001-08-23 23:01:16 RE: User locks code