On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:15:20AM -0500, Daniel Jakots wrote: > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/antirez/redis/5.0/00-RELEASENOTES > > Since Redis 5.0 is still able to read 4.0 mdb format, I assume for a > user there is nothing to do. I guess you don't plan to add anything to > current.html do you?
While I read it the same way as you and it should be a no-brainer for most, I was going to add a note with this link to current.html to be on the safe side. > > look as if there is no risk of losing data due to the migration and > > looking around on the net I couldn't find any reports of breakage. > > However, I don't know and can't know for sure. > > > > Since we're playing with user data here, it might be more prudent to > > provide a redis5 port, and to leave it to the users to decide if and > > when they want to migrate instead of forcing it upon them right when > > the update goes in (or when they upgrade to 6.7). > > AFAIK, redis is (or should be) used as a cache i.e. losing its data is > a small inconvenience but shouldn't be a problem. I don't think > duplicating the port is worth it. It is a persistent key value store, which is not necessarily used for purely transient data. A common use case is to use it as a state machine and to update counters. I don't think we should jeopardize this data lightly. > > A detail: redis-sentinel is installed as a symlink to redis-server. > > Ports seem to do this frequently, but I wonder if that should be > > turned into a hard link as is usually done in base? > > What are the pro/cons of using a hard link instead? I don't know. It just stands out in the PLIST because of the missing @bin marker.
