santosh_kumar

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by santosh_kumar 15y ago

   So, this would mean every call you make to redis (not just the del) would need to be guarded against all of these reasons you have cited. To me that's just overkill. If transactionality is that important, redis may not be the right tool.
2. 2.▲
   by santosh_kumar 15y ago

   What I've tried to show in the safe_ips example is just one thing. That the safe_ips list does not have to be deleted to be modified. The fact that redis semantics allows us to atomically do that is awesome. If process B were to overwrite t
3. 3.▲
   by santosh_kumar 15y ago

   Thanks for the detailed analysis. A quick thing to consider though, if redis.del fails, it can only mean redis is busted. This means, that none of the examples in any context that use redis in anyway have any bearing. Hence, guarding agains
4. 4.▲
   Expressing Ruby -- stop holding back Ruby and let it speak it's mind(santosh79.tumblr.com)

   1 points by santosh_kumar 16y ago|0 comments