4 ms·
Very cool! Any reason why this wouldn't make its way into the official releases of redis?
by t0mbstone 8y ago
Very cool! Any reason why this wouldn't make its way into the official releases of redis?
- JakeTyo 8y agoI'm curious too. Why fork for this one thing? There must be a good reason.
- DrJosiah 8y agoNot just one thing, multiple things. Transactions, performance improvements, and long-term, more, that rely on Transactions and other parts that Salvatore has expressly stated that he wasn't interested in.
- tedmiston 8y agoPresumably they'll have to sort out what kind of performance hit it has and how to address that longterm, but I think you're correct. It's probably more complicated than that given that the Redis security page begins with: > Redis is designed to be accessed by trusted clients inside trusted environments. https://redis.io/topics/security https://redis.io/topics/security I think the current recommended approach for this use case is to wrap it with stunnel.
- DrJosiah 8y agoPlease re-read. It's spiped. Fixed 1k blocks, but otherwise reasonable. But #4855 is going to be merged, and my tests show that #4855 is actually faster than my changes, so ... :) I like not having to be responsible for writing SSL/TLS code, even if I just spent 9 weeks doing it. :P
- danudey 8y agoIt looks like Amazon's patches are already on their way in: https://github.com/antirez/redis/pull/4855 https://github.com/antirez/redis/pull/4855