ShardedJedisPipeline

[Eric Hauser]

I was going to submit a pull request for this, but thought I would check first.  Is the intention to make the ShardedJedisPipeline API work like the new Pipeline API?   I think we can make it work so it is backwords compatible or should we not worry about compatibility in the API for this? The new version of the API is a nice improvement.

[Jonathan Leibiusky]

Hi!
Yes, it would be a nice feature to make ShardedJedisPipeline like Pipeline. I think that in order to include it in Jedis 2.x it should be backward compatible. How do you think you can make it backward compatible in a way that in version 3.0.0 we can remove old usage and leave a clean API?

Jonathan

[Eric Hauser]

- Remove abstract from class and execute method
- Deprecate execute

- Add the sync commands

- Have the existing commands return Response<T>

[Jonathan Leibiusky]

But if you change existing commands to return Response<> you'll be breaking the API, right? Or did I miss something? :)

[Eric Hauser]

What's your definition of breaking? It will still compile since they all all return void now.

[Jonathan Leibiusky]

oh yeah, you are right. forgot about the fact they are void.
awesome! so it sounds like a good plan! it will be a great addition to a 2.1.0 :)
I need to add some other fixes, so it is a good timing!

let me know if you need help!

[f00biebletch]

Is there a plan to implement binary commands on the sharded pipeline?

On Jun 2, 1:34 pm, Jonathan Leibiusky <ionat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> oh yeah, you are right. forgot about the fact they are void.
> awesome! so it sounds like a good plan! it will be a great addition to a
> 2.1.0 :)
> I need to add some other fixes, so it is a good timing!
>
> let me know if you need help!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Eric Hauser <ewhau...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What's your definition of breaking? It will still compile since they all
> > all return void now.
>

> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Jonathan Leibiusky <ionat...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> But if you change existing commands to return Response<> you'll be
> >> breaking the API, right? Or did I miss something? :)
>

> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Eric Hauser <ewhau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> - Remove abstract from class and execute method
> >>> - Deprecate execute
> >>> - Add the sync commands
> >>> - Have the existing commands return Response<T>
>

> >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Jonathan Leibiusky <ionat...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>>> Hi!
> >>>> Yes, it would be a nice feature to make ShardedJedisPipeline like
> >>>> Pipeline. I think that in order to include it in Jedis 2.x it should be
> >>>> backward compatible. How do you think you can make it backward compatible in
> >>>> a way that in version 3.0.0 we can remove old usage and leave a clean API?
>
> >>>> Jonathan
>

[Jonathan Leibiusky]

Sure! there is a pull request that will be merged soon and will be part of 2.1.0
So expect it to be available very very soon!