Note that we only do it when STORE is not used, otherwise we want an
absolutely locale independent and binary safe sorting in order to ensure
AOF / replication consistency.
This is probably an unexpected behavior violating the least surprise
rule, but there is currently no other simple / good alternative.
Note that we only do it when STORE is not used, otherwise we want an
absolutely locale independent and binary safe sorting in order to ensure
AOF / replication consistency.
This is probably an unexpected behavior violating the least surprise
rule, but there is currently no other simple / good alternative.
compareStringObject was not always giving the same result when comparing
two exact strings, but encoded as integers or as sds strings, since it
switched to strcmp() when at least one of the strings were not sds
encoded.
For instance the two strings "123" and "123\x00456", where the first
string was integer encoded, would result into the old implementation of
compareStringObject() to return 0 as if the strings were equal, while
instead the second string is "greater" than the first in a binary
comparison.
The same compasion, but with "123" encoded as sds string, would instead
return a value < 0, as it is correct. It is not impossible that the
above caused some obscure bug, since the comparison was not always
deterministic, and compareStringObject() is used in the implementation
of skiplists, hash tables, and so forth.
At the same time, collateStringObject() was introduced by this commit, so
that can be used by SORT command to return sorted strings usign
collation instead of binary comparison. See next commit.
compareStringObject was not always giving the same result when comparing
two exact strings, but encoded as integers or as sds strings, since it
switched to strcmp() when at least one of the strings were not sds
encoded.
For instance the two strings "123" and "123\x00456", where the first
string was integer encoded, would result into the old implementation of
compareStringObject() to return 0 as if the strings were equal, while
instead the second string is "greater" than the first in a binary
comparison.
The same compasion, but with "123" encoded as sds string, would instead
return a value < 0, as it is correct. It is not impossible that the
above caused some obscure bug, since the comparison was not always
deterministic, and compareStringObject() is used in the implementation
of skiplists, hash tables, and so forth.
At the same time, collateStringObject() was introduced by this commit, so
that can be used by SORT command to return sorted strings usign
collation instead of binary comparison. See next commit.
The function returns an unique identifier for the client, as ip:port for
IPv4 and IPv6 clients, or as path:0 for Unix socket clients.
See the top comment in the function for more info.
The function returns an unique identifier for the client, as ip:port for
IPv4 and IPv6 clients, or as path:0 for Unix socket clients.
See the top comment in the function for more info.
IPv6 support is not going to use IPv6 specific options, just it will be
possible to specify all the ipv4 / ipv6 addresses of the interfaces to
bind, otherwise connections will be accepted from all the interfaces in
both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
This reverts commit e2517f47cdb069df67b6ac2a6a295c717c202305.
IPv6 support is not going to use IPv6 specific options, just it will be
possible to specify all the ipv4 / ipv6 addresses of the interfaces to
bind, otherwise connections will be accepted from all the interfaces in
both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
This reverts commit 93570e179e96dc096b85aa0fcd5021b05208594a.
This has been done by exposing the anetSockName() function anet.c
to be used when the sentinel is publishing its existence to the masters.
This implementation is very unintelligent as it will likely break if used
with IPv6 as the nested colons will break any parsing of the PUBLISH string
by the master.
This has been done by exposing the anetSockName() function anet.c
to be used when the sentinel is publishing its existence to the masters.
This implementation is very unintelligent as it will likely break if used
with IPv6 as the nested colons will break any parsing of the PUBLISH string
by the master.
