Dear John:

Thanks for your answers very much. I have found that there were so may
technique points in your implementations :). Currently, I am still using
my own implementations, and I will let you know if I use your Fastbit code
in my research. Thanks again.

Regards,
Mian


> Dear Mian,
>
> The bitvector class performs bitwise logical operations as much as
> possible in compressed mode, however, there are cases where producing
> a uncompressed result is faster, then we produce uncompressed results.
>   Our VLDB 2004 paper deals with this kind of choices in detail
> <http://lbl.gov/%7Ekwu/ps/LBNL-54673.html>.  There are additional
> details on this issue at <http://lbl.gov/%7Ekwu/ps/LBNL-49627.html>
> and <http://lbl.gov/%7Ekwu/ps/PUB-3161.html>.
>
> There are a number of functions in ibis::index class to sum (OR) a
> number of bitmaps together, e.g., sumBits and addBits.  These
> functions are based on the discussion from VLDB 2004 paper.  You might
> consider using them instead of your own.
>
> Now that we are on the issue of whether you can use part of the code
> without the rest, I see two related issues.  On the patent right, as
> long as what you are doing is for research purpose only, you will be
> permitted to use the WAH compression implemented in ibis::bitvector
> class (under the fair use exception).  On the software side, you are
> technically still using FastBit code, therefore, must respect FastBit
> license (LGPL).  By the way, I am not a lawyer and am not authorized
> to speak on behalf of my employer (who holds the patent right and owns
> the software) on this matter, therefore my answer is purely a personal
> opinion.
>
> John
>
>
> On 10/16/2009 2:41 AM, Mian Lu wrote:
>> Hi John:
>>
>> I am studying your fastbit code recently. I have tried the AND
>> operations
>> on two bitvector classes, but found that the direct result vector looks
>> like not compressed (I observed the output result through the print
>> function). Only after the function compress() is executed, then it is
>> compressed. Am I right? I want to ask whether this way is more efficient
>> than the direct compressed result is produced? Moreover, if I want to
>> perform multiple AND on multiple bitvector classes, then the compress()
>> should be called after each operation?
>>
>> Since I also have tried to implement the WAH algorithm by myself, but
>> not
>> so efficient compared with your fastbit. Therefore I want to adopt some
>> codes from your fastbit in my research project (I hope it is okay).
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mian
>>
>


_______________________________________________
FastBit-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://hpcrdm.lbl.gov/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fastbit-users

Reply via email to