hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Laurence Hubert" <Laurence.Hub...@free.fr>
Subject Re: Google patent over Map Reduce - Hbase reflections
Date Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:29:57 GMT
Hi Andry, Bruce,



> It's a fair argument that Hadoop mapreduce is a Google MapReduce clone --  
> which
> has been extended in several directions by the community, of course. Given 
> that,
> and the in my personal experience substantial commercial application of 
> the
> technology already, clearly the success story has already spread far 
> beyond any
> reasonable definition of "academic".

Absolutely true. I am the proof of this :-) It turns out that I am a BIG FAN 
of both
Hadoop and Hbase and I have a true willingness to use them in a real 
business ... and
as soon as this business develops commit development resources to it. So I 
am not
questioning the value of the work because I know this is great work and I 
know the
adoption is going to be huge.


> I am also of the opinion that this is a defensive move by Google. It would 
> be in
> direct opposition to years of experience we have with this company should 
> they
> go after the ASF in any way.

I tend to agree (and with Bruce as well). Still from a business perspective 
this is a risk
and I hate risks :-(

> Furthermore, I'm not a patent lawyer, but I believe for the HBase case, 
> that
> HBase (and HDFS) are not covered by these patents, except for the 
> mapreduce
> integration package, which could be dropped without any loss of HBase
> functionality for clients using the HBase client API. So the direct impact 
> on
> HBase for some worst-case scenario would be low as far as I can see.

Unfortunately when you use HBase this is because you have to process large 
amount of data
which means that by nature many of the HBase adopters are ALSO hadoop 
adopters.
But thank you for your comment because somehow it helps understand the 
degree at which
we would be impacted if Google wanted to enforce its intellectual property.

Thanks Andy and Bruce, somehow the discussion helped.

Laurence

----- Original Message ----
> From: Laurence Hubert <Laurence.Hubert@free.fr>
> To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, January 21, 2010 7:33:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Google patent over Map Reduce - Hbase reflections
>
> Dear all,
>
> I think the impact of this patent should not be underestimated. If 
> Hadoop/HBase
> is only an educational system and not used by anybody for any business 
> then I
> agree there is no threat to the community...
> but if companies are relaying on it to do business (and some started to 
> evaluate
> the use of Hadoop/HBase in commercial systems) then the companies 
> businesses or
> products might be threatened. This means, unless something is done, 
> companies
> cannot select Hadoop/HBase anymore for implementations because this is too 
> much
> of a risk... which is in fact the biggest threat to hadoop... it was 
> becoming
> popular and companies started to consider supporting it (providing 
> development
> resources...) because this was a possible platform for their businesses...
>
> In my opinion a healthy attitude to this would be to analyse what was 
> actually
> *really* protected and be creative on how hadoop could/should 
> differentiate.
> Because if hadoop is just a 1:1 replica of the Google system, then there 
> is no
> chance that it will attract more than the academic community and its nice
> success story is going to end here... I see enough intellectual power in 
> the
> team to be able to take the Google patent and produce the next 
> generation...
>
> My two cents,
> Laurence Hubert
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kay Kay"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 3:28 AM
> Subject: Re: Google patent over Map Reduce - Hbase reflections
>
>
> > On 1/20/10 3:44 PM, stack wrote:
> >> I've been following the thread.  I would tend to side with the general 
> >> tenor
> >> that has it that its likely a just-in-case move by Google and that the
> >> likelihood of a Google suing Apache is not likely to happen in this
> >> dimension.
> >>
> >>
> > That was my general idea as well.
> >
> >> Are you (or your employer) spooked Kay Kay?
> >>
> >>
> > Not at all - but just started this to see what the opinions of the
> > community might be w.r.t. this.
> >
> >> St.Ack
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Kay Kay  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> A big thread currently going on at the hadoop common user mailing 
> >>> list -
> >>>
> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-common-user/201001.mbox/<
> >>> 2c36b701001200817g77f245b1x6ba9d7d2cfd9ec93@mail.gmail.com>  .
> >>>
> >>> A good number of you might have already seen that thread, but just 
> >>> opening
> >>> up a thread for discussion to see what the thoughts of the community 
> >>> are ,
> >>> w.r.t. patent and how much (if at all) of the application would be 
> >>> related
> >>> to that / any refactorings as necessary as seen by the team or 
> >>> thoughts in
> >>> general to the same.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 9.0.730 / Base de données virale: 271.1.1/2635 - Date: 01/20/10
> 20:18:00








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 9.0.730 / Base de données virale: 271.1.1/2636 - Date: 01/21/10 
08:34:00


Mime
View raw message