Lua scripts are executed in the context of the currently selected
database (as selected by the caller of the script).
However Lua scripts are also free to use the SELECT command in order to
affect other DBs. When SELECT is called frm Lua, the old behavior, before
this commit, was to automatically set the Lua caller selected DB to the
last DB selected by Lua. See for example the following sequence of
commands:
SELECT 0
SET x 10
EVAL "redis.call('select','1')" 0
SET x 20
Before this commit after the execution of this sequence of commands,
we'll have x=10 in DB 0, and x=20 in DB 1.
Because of the problem above, there was a bug affecting replication of
Lua scripts, because of the actual implementation of replication. It was
possible to fix the implementation of Lua scripts in order to fix the
issue, but looking closely, the bug is the consequence of the behavior
of Lua ability to set the caller's DB.
Under the old semantics, a script selecting a different DB, has no simple
ways to restore the state and select back the previously selected DB.
Moreover the script auhtor must remember that the restore is needed,
otherwise the new commands executed by the caller, will be executed in
the context of a different DB.
So this commit fixes both the replication issue, and this hard-to-use
semantics, by removing the ability of Lua, after the script execution,
to force the caller to switch to the DB selected by the Lua script.
The new behavior of the previous sequence of commadns is to just set
X=20 in DB 0. However Lua scripts are still capable of writing / reading
from different DBs if needed.
WARNING: This is a semantical change that will break programs that are
conceived to select the client selected DB via Lua scripts.
This fixes issue #1811.
Lua scripts are executed in the context of the currently selected
database (as selected by the caller of the script).
However Lua scripts are also free to use the SELECT command in order to
affect other DBs. When SELECT is called frm Lua, the old behavior, before
this commit, was to automatically set the Lua caller selected DB to the
last DB selected by Lua. See for example the following sequence of
commands:
SELECT 0
SET x 10
EVAL "redis.call('select','1')" 0
SET x 20
Before this commit after the execution of this sequence of commands,
we'll have x=10 in DB 0, and x=20 in DB 1.
Because of the problem above, there was a bug affecting replication of
Lua scripts, because of the actual implementation of replication. It was
possible to fix the implementation of Lua scripts in order to fix the
issue, but looking closely, the bug is the consequence of the behavior
of Lua ability to set the caller's DB.
Under the old semantics, a script selecting a different DB, has no simple
ways to restore the state and select back the previously selected DB.
Moreover the script auhtor must remember that the restore is needed,
otherwise the new commands executed by the caller, will be executed in
the context of a different DB.
So this commit fixes both the replication issue, and this hard-to-use
semantics, by removing the ability of Lua, after the script execution,
to force the caller to switch to the DB selected by the Lua script.
The new behavior of the previous sequence of commadns is to just set
X=20 in DB 0. However Lua scripts are still capable of writing / reading
from different DBs if needed.
WARNING: This is a semantical change that will break programs that are
conceived to select the client selected DB via Lua scripts.
This fixes issue #1811.
It is more straightforward to just test for a numerical type avoiding
Lua's automatic conversion. The code is technically more correct now,
however Lua should automatically convert to number only if the original
type is a string that "looks like a number", and not from other types,
so practically speaking the fix is identical AFAIK.
It is more straightforward to just test for a numerical type avoiding
Lua's automatic conversion. The code is technically more correct now,
however Lua should automatically convert to number only if the original
type is a string that "looks like a number", and not from other types,
so practically speaking the fix is identical AFAIK.
The new check-for-number behavior of Lua arguments broke
users who use large strings of just integers.
The Lua number check would convert the string to a number, but
that breaks user data because
Lua numbers have limited precision compared to an arbitrarily
precise number wrapped in a string.
Regression fixed and new test added.
Fixes#1118 again.
The new check-for-number behavior of Lua arguments broke
users who use large strings of just integers.
The Lua number check would convert the string to a number, but
that breaks user data because
Lua numbers have limited precision compared to an arbitrarily
precise number wrapped in a string.
Regression fixed and new test added.
Fixes#1118 again.
The new ROLE command is designed in order to provide a client with
informations about the replication in a fast and easy to use way
compared to the INFO command where the same information is also
available.
The new ROLE command is designed in order to provide a client with
informations about the replication in a fast and easy to use way
compared to the INFO command where the same information is also
available.
Since there are ways to alter the configEpoch outside of the failover
procedure (for exampel CLUSTER SET-CONFIG-EPOCH and via the configEpoch
collision resolution algorithm), make always sure, before replacing our
configEpoch with a new one, that it is greater than the current one.
Since there are ways to alter the configEpoch outside of the failover
procedure (for exampel CLUSTER SET-CONFIG-EPOCH and via the configEpoch
collision resolution algorithm), make always sure, before replacing our
configEpoch with a new one, that it is greater than the current one.
