Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents
| От | Joshua D. Drake |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 42696996.40008@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Software Patents
|
| Список | pgsql-www |
>>We are not building an artificial heart here, we are building a database >>and databases have been around for decades. > > > Well, ARC seems like a new database idea, at least in the past few > years. Are you saying ARC is either "ridiculous" or has prior art? I > know 2Q is similar, but not identical, and ARC does have some small > improvements over it. In this case I would say it is both. 2Q should (if not is) be considered prior art. Otherwise it would not have been as plug-n-play as it was. Note I am not making light of the work that it took, I couldn't have done it and I am glad that someone else had to. Secondly I would say that an ARC patent is ridiculous based on the above experience. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedication Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: