|
|
 | | From: | Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD | | Subject: | Re: ARC patent | | Date: | Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:54:23 +0100 |
|
|
 |
> > There's a very recent paper at
> > http://carmen.cs.uiuc.edu/~zchen9/paper/TPDS-final.ps on an alternative
> > to ARC which claims superior performance ...
>
> From a quick glance, this doesn't look applicable. The authors are
> discussing buffer replacement strategies for a multi-level cache
> hierarchy (e.g. they would call the DBMS buffer cache "L1", and the
Yes, it might not matter however. Another algorithm that was written by
university folk (thus probably not patent prone) that looks promising is:
http://www.cs.wm.edu/hpcs/WWW/HTML/publications/papers/TR-02-6.pdf
http://parapet.ee.princeton.edu/~sigm2002/papers/p31-jiang.pdf (same, but better typeset)
It even seems to slightly beat ARC according to the MQ paper.
Andreas
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
|
|
| | From: | Travis P | | Subject: | Re: ARC patent | | Date: | Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:33:12 -0600 |
|
|
|
On Jan 19, 2005, at 4:54 AM, Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD wrote:
> Another algorithm that was written by
> university folk (thus probably not patent prone) that looks promising
> is:
> http://www.cs.wm.edu/hpcs/WWW/HTML/publications/papers/TR-02-6.pdf
> http://parapet.ee.princeton.edu/~sigm2002/papers/p31-jiang.pdf (same,
> but better typeset)
Do not assume that University algorithms are not patent protected.
They definitely may be and I know they sometimes are.
Princeton has an office dedicated to the issue:
http://www.princeton.edu/patents/
-Travis
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
|
|
|
