Re: User locks code

> > No, you were clear.
> 
> So I missed your "near-zero cost" sentence.

OK.

> > My assumption is that once you link that code into
> > the backend, the entire backend is GPL'ed and any other
> > application code you link into it is also (stored procedures,
> > triggers, etc.) I don't think your client application will
> > be GPL'ed, assuming you didn't link in libreadline.
> 
> Application would explicitly call user_lock() functions in
> queries, so issue is still not clear for me. And once again -

Well, yes, it calls user_lock(), but the communication is not OS-linked,
it is linked over a network socket, so I don't think the GPL spreads
over a socket.  Just as telnet'ing somewhere an typing 'bash' doesn't
make your telnet GPL'ed, so I think the client code is safe.  To the
client, the backend is just returning information.  You don't really
link to the query results.

> compare complexities of contrib/userlock and backend' userlock
> code: what's reason to cover contrib/userlock by GPL?

Only because Massimo prefers it.  I can think of no other reason.  It
clearly GPL-stamps any backend that links it in.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026