- 23 12月, 2013 2 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
There were two problems with the implementation. 1) "save" was not correctly processed when no save point was configured, as reported in issue #1416. 2) The way the code checked if an option existed in the "processed" dictionary was wrong, as we add the element with as a key associated with a NULL value, so dictFetchValue() can't be used to check for existance, but dictFind() must be used, that returns NULL only if the entry does not exist at all.
-
由 antirez 提交于
This was no longer the case with 2.8 becuase of a bug introduced with the IPv6 support. Now it is fixed. This fixes issue #1287 and #1477.
-
- 22 12月, 2013 3 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
Currently replication offsets could be used into a limited way in order to understand, out of a set of slaves, what is the one with the most updated data. For example this comparison is possible of N slaves were replicating all with the same master. However the replication offset was not transferred from master to slaves (that are later promoted as masters) in any way, so for instance if there were three instances A, B, C, with A master and B and C replication from A, the following could happen: C disconnects from A. B is turned into master. A is switched to master of B. B receives some write. In this context there was no way to compare the offset of A and C, because B would use its own local master replication offset as replication offset to initialize the replication with A. With this commit what happens is that when B is turned into master it inherits the replication offset from A, making A and C comparable. In the above case assuming no inconsistencies are created during the disconnection and failover process, A will show to have a replication offset greater than C. Note that this does not mean offsets are always comparable to understand what is, in a set of instances, since in more complex examples the replica with the higher replication offset could be partitioned away when picking the instance to elect as new master. However this in general improves the ability of a system to try to pick a good replica to promote to master.
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
When the configured node timeout is very small, the data validity time (maximum data age for a slave to try a failover) is too little (ten times the configured node timeout) when the replication link with the master is mostly idle. In this case we'll receive some data from the master only every server.repl_ping_slave_period to refresh the last interaction with the master. This commit adds to the max data validity time the slave ping period to avoid this problem of slaves sensing too old data without a good reason. However this max data validity time is likely a setting that should be configurable by the Redis Cluster user in a way completely independent from the node timeout.
-
- 21 12月, 2013 2 次提交
- 20 12月, 2013 4 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
This commit makes it simple to start an handshake with a specific node address, and uses this in order to detect a node IP change and start a new handshake in order to fix the IP if possible.
-
由 antirez 提交于
As specified in the Redis Cluster specification, when a node can reach the majority again after a period in which it was partitioend away with the minorty of masters, wait some time before accepting queries, to provide a reasonable amount of time for other nodes to upgrade its configuration. This lowers the probabilities of both a client and a master with not updated configuration to rejoin the cluster at the same time, with a stale master accepting writes.
-
- 19 12月, 2013 6 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
CONFIG REWRITE is now wiser and does not touch what it does not understand inside redis.conf.
-
由 Yubao Liu 提交于
Those options will be thrown without this patch: include, rename-command, min-slaves-to-write, min-slaves-max-lag, appendfilename.
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
With this commit options not explicitly rewritten by CONFIG REWRITE are not touched at all. These include new options that may not have support for REWRITE, and other special cases like rename-command and include.
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
- 17 12月, 2013 7 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
The value was otherwise undefined, so next time the node was promoted again from slave to master, adding a slave to the list of slaves would likely crash the server or result into undefined behavior.
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
Later this should be configurable from the command line but at least now we use something more appropriate for our use case compared to the redis-rb default timeout.
-
由 antirez 提交于
This prevented 32bit cluster instances from clearing the FAIL flag when needed.
-
由 antirez 提交于
Ping sent and pong received fields need to be casted to long long to be printed correctly into 32 bit systems.
-
- 13 12月, 2013 4 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
The bug could be easily triggered by: SADD foo a b c 1 2 3 4 5 6 SDIFF foo foo When the key was the same in two sets, an unsafe iterator was used to check existence of elements in the same set we were iterating. Usually this would just result into a wrong output, however with the dict.c API misuse protection we have in place, the result was actually an assertion failed that was triggered by the CI test, while creating random datasets for the "MASTER and SLAVE consistency" test.
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
- 12 12月, 2013 4 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
See issue #1448.
-
由 Salvatore Sanfilippo 提交于
fix typo in redis.conf and sentinel.conf
-
由 Salvatore Sanfilippo 提交于
comment mistake fixed
-
由 codeeply 提交于
-
- 11 12月, 2013 8 次提交
-
-
由 antirez 提交于
When a slave was disconnected from its master the replication offset was reported as -1. Now it is reported as the replication offset of the previous master, so that failover can be performed using this value in order to try to select a slave with more processed data from a set of slaves of the old master.
-
由 Salvatore Sanfilippo 提交于
Return proper error on requests with an unbalanced number of quotes.
-
由 Yossi Gottlieb 提交于
-
由 Yubao Liu 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
The previous fix for false positive timeout detected by master was not complete. There is another blocking stage while loading data for the first synchronization with the master, that is, flushing away the current data from the DB memory. This commit uses the newly introduced dict.c callback in order to make some incremental work (to send "\n" heartbeats to the master) while flushing the old data from memory. It is hard to write a regression test for this issue unfortunately. More support for debugging in the Redis core would be needed in terms of functionalities to simulate a slow DB loading / deletion.
-
由 antirez 提交于
Redis hash table implementation has many non-blocking features like incremental rehashing, however while deleting a large hash table there was no way to have a callback called to do some incremental work. This commit adds this support, as an optiona callback argument to dictEmpty() that is currently called at a fixed interval (one time every 65k deletions).
-
由 antirez 提交于
-
由 antirez 提交于
-