gvsafronov/futriix
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

TODO file removed.

Browse Source 
The list of things to do is since long time in two places:

1) Github issues.
2) I've a private TOOD list of random ideas, what makes sense is later
moved to github issues. So github is anyway the true source of things to
do.
This commit is contained in:
antirez 2012-05-20 23:47:45 +02:00
parent 287caeca4c
commit 385db2d44a
1 changed files with 0 additions and 45 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

45
TODO
View File

@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
Redis TODO
----------
WARNING: are you a possible Redis contributor?
Before implementing what is listed in this file
please drop a message in the Redis google group or chat with
antirez or pietern on irc.freenode.org #redis to check if the work
is already in progress and if the feature is still interesting for
us, and *how* exactly this can be implemented to have good changes
of a merge. Otherwise it is probably wasted work! Thank you
CLUSTER
=======
* Implement rehashing and cluster check in redis-trib.
* Reimplement MIGRATE / RESTORE to use just in memory buffers (no disk at
all). This will require touching a lot of the RDB stuff around, but we may
hand with faster persistence for RDB.
* Implement the slave nodes semantics and election.
* Allow redis-trib to create a cluster-wide snapshot (using SYNC).
* Allow redis-trib to restore a cluster-wide snapshot (implement UPLOAD?).
SCRIPTING
=========
* SCRIPT FLUSH or alike to start a fresh interpreter?
OPTIMIZATIONS
=============
* SORT: Don't copy the list into a vector when BY argument is constant.
* Write the hash table size of every db in the dump, so that Redis can resize the hash table just one time when loading a big DB.
* Read-only mode for slaves.
* Redis big lists as linked lists of small ziplists?
Possibly a simple heuristic that join near nodes when some node gets smaller than the low_level, and split it into two if gets bigger than high_level.
KNOWN BUGS
==========
* #519: Slave may have expired keys that were never read in the master (so a DEL
is not sent in the replication channel) but are already expired since
a lot of time. Maybe after a given delay that is undoubtably greater than
the replication link latency we should expire this key on the slave on
access?