> >> FYI, IBM has applied for a patent on ARC (AFAICS the patent application
> >> is still pending, although the USPTO site is a little hard to grok):
> >
> >>
>
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220040098541%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20040098541&RS=DN/20040098541
> >
> > Ugh. We could hope that the patent wouldn't be granted, but I think
> > it unlikely, unless Jan is aware of prior art (like a publication
> > predating the filing date). I fear we'll have to change or remove
> > that code.
> >
> > regards, tom lane
>
> Unfortunately no. The document that inspired me to adapt ARC for
> PostgreSQL is from the USENIX File & Storage Technologies Conference
> (FAST), March 31, 2003, San Francisco, CA.
>
> I am seriously concerned about this and think we should not knowingly
> release code that is possibly infringing a patent.
I thought IBM granted the right to use these methods in OSS software.
PostgreSQL is OSS software, thus only such entities relicensing pg
need to worry about the patent.
Also the algo is probably sufficiently altered already to not be subject
to the patent, no ?
Andreas