qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (QPID-1766) Implemention of selector using Xquery
Date Mon, 23 Mar 2009 02:10:50 GMT
Robert Greig wrote:
> 2009/3/22 chenta lee <chenta@gmail.com>:
>
>   
>> Yes, what I mean is the concept of message selector, not how we implement
>> it. And Xquery is mush more powerful than SQL-92 syntax.By MQ, I refer to
>> Message Queue instead of a particular message queue project.
>>     
>
> OK. xquery may be semantically richer but the JMS message selector
> functionality operates on message headers not message bodies.
> Selecting on headers will be hugely faster than on the body. There are
> clear use cases for both.
>
>   


I know Jonathan has updated the XML exchange to not parse the body if 
the Query only specifies
headers. We should do that here too.


>> I am a little confused about how could my patches related to patent issue?
>>     
>
> I am not sure of the details of exactly what Red Hat has patented (I
> have not read the patent text myself). However the Red Hat people are
> on this mailing list so I am sure they will be able to clarify. From
> what I have read, the patent covers an AMQP exchange that implements
> xquery which is not what you are describing.
>
>   

no, it isn't related at all. The piece that it covered has already been 
provided under a license grant to
the ASF (XML Exchange), and will be feely licensed to anyone that uses 
AMQP if it is ever granted.

regards,
Carl.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message