3 ms·
This paper (from 2015) seems to be saying that: "(...) The Bε-tree has since been used by both the high-performance, commercial TokuDB database [4] and the Be
by mirekrusin 5y ago
This paper (from 2015) seems to be saying that:
"(...) The Bε-tree has since been used
by both the high-performance, commercial TokuDB
database [4] and the BetrFS research file system [5]. (...)"
First citation from the paper links to http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/loris.marchal/docs-data-aware/brodal_fagerberg_LB_EM_dict.pdf http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/loris.marchal/docs-data-aware/broda... – is this the paper you're referring to as prior-art for Bε-trees?
- mbravenboer 5y agoYeah, though I'm not a laywer and I have not personally studied the Tokutek patent in detail. I did consult at some point on this with somebody experienced in database-related software patents, but please do not take legal advice from me :). My understanding is that Be-trees are not covered by a valid patent, either because of clear prior art or because Tokutek patented a different data structure. Be-trees are simpler than the original fractal tree afaik (they were not aware of Be-trees at the time of their innovation).