Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Redis DB
Home
+ new post
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion optional STORE argument for read operations?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Josiah Carlson  
View profile  
 More options Nov 1 2012, 2:56 pm
From: Josiah Carlson <josiah.carl...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:56:51 -0700
Local: Thurs, Nov 1 2012 2:56 pm
Subject: Re: optional STORE argument for read operations?
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Salvatore Sanfilippo <anti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, you can use Lua Scripting in Redis 2.6 to solve all the scenarios
> you describe.

> I think that while many protocol extensions like this seem natural,
> the risk is to add STORE, then a generic NX option, and so forth, and
> you get with half-a-language that does not benefit in the long run
> IMHO. Instead just going for a Lua script is the simplest thing :-)

> It is much better to provide fast Lua primitives in the future for
> things we'll need. For instance we can have C-coded functions in Lua
> that do things like redis.mass_add_to_set(lua_array) or alike, that
> can avoid writing a loop inside Lua.

So a special C-implemented API for interacting with the underlying
system, as opposed to using the redis.call() interface?

That seems to me to be rife with "I want internal API X", which is the
same problem, only now there are 2 APIs (the external and internal).

What about just offering the ability to call 3rd party C extensions
stored in .so modules via Lua? Combine that with a relatively fixed
C-API for major components in Redis for major releases, and you
basically have the Postgres 3rd party situation (which has worked
great for them).

 - Josiah


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google