Robert Greig wrote:
2009/3/22 chenta lee <che...@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.
