The `LRANK` command returns the index (position) of a given element
within a list. Using the `direction` argument it is possible to specify
going from head to tail (acending, 1) or from tail to head (decending,
-1). Only the first found index is returend. The complexity is O(N).
When using lists as a queue it can be of interest at what position a
given element is, for instance to monitor a job processing through a
work queue. This came up within the Python `rq` project which is based
on Redis[0].
[0]: https://github.com/rq/rq/issues/1197
Signed-off-by: Paul Spooren <mail@aparcar.org>
The `LRANK` command returns the index (position) of a given element
within a list. Using the `direction` argument it is possible to specify
going from head to tail (acending, 1) or from tail to head (decending,
-1). Only the first found index is returend. The complexity is O(N).
When using lists as a queue it can be of interest at what position a
given element is, for instance to monitor a job processing through a
work queue. This came up within the Python `rq` project which is based
on Redis[0].
[0]: https://github.com/rq/rq/issues/1197
Signed-off-by: Paul Spooren <mail@aparcar.org>
Much like MULTI/EXEC/DISCARD, the WATCH and UNWATCH are not actually
operating on the database or server state, but instead operate on the
client state. the client may send them all in one long pipeline and check
all the responses only at the end, so failing them may lead to a
mismatch between the client state on the server and the one on the
client end, and execute the wrong commands (ones that were meant to be
discarded)
the watched keys are not actually stored in the client struct, but they
are in fact part of the client state. for instance, they're not cleared
or moved in SWAPDB or FLUSHDB.
the recent change in that loop (iteration rather than waiting for it to
be empty) was intended to avoid an endless loop in case some slave would
refuse to be freed.
but the lookup of the first client remained, which would have caused it
to try the first one again and again instead of moving on.
the recent change in that loop (iteration rather than waiting for it to
be empty) was intended to avoid an endless loop in case some slave would
refuse to be freed.
but the lookup of the first client remained, which would have caused it
to try the first one again and again instead of moving on.
Much like MULTI/EXEC/DISCARD, the WATCH and UNWATCH are not actually
operating on the database or server state, but instead operate on the
client state. the client may send them all in one long pipeline and check
all the responses only at the end, so failing them may lead to a
mismatch between the client state on the server and the one on the
client end, and execute the wrong commands (ones that were meant to be
discarded)
the watched keys are not actually stored in the client struct, but they
are in fact part of the client state. for instance, they're not cleared
or moved in SWAPDB or FLUSHDB.
This impacts client verification for chained certificates (such as Lets
Encrypt certificates). Client Verify requires the full chain in order to
properly verify the certificate.
`clusterStartHandshake` will start hand handshake
and eventually send CLUSTER MEET message, which is strictly prohibited
in the REDIS CLUSTER SPEC.
Only system administrator can initiate CLUSTER MEET message.
Futher, according to the SPEC, rather than IP/PORT pairs, only nodeid
can be trusted.
Now it is also possible for ACL SETUSER to accept empty strings
as valid operations (doing nothing), so for instance
ACL SETUSER myuser ""
Will have just the effect of creating a user in the default state.
This should fix#7329.
