| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <npboley(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: More FOR UPDATE/FOR SHARE problems |
| Date: | 2009-01-27 16:30:23 |
| Message-ID: | 497EE23F.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Hopefully it's not patent encumbered? Might be better not to check
> actually.
I've been in correspondence with the authors. That is the first
question I asked them. The response (from Michael Cahill):
- There are no patent applications covering our work, as far as we are
- aware. That is, no patent applications have been lodged for our
- work, and no applications are planned. To the best of our
- knowledge, our work in this area was novel, so we are not aware of
- any prior patents that cover our work.
But seriously, I don't want this to lead to a discussion which pulls
people from getting 8.4 out the door.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-01-27 16:30:29 | Re: 8.4 release planning (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-27 16:26:18 | Re: 8.4 release planning |