-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Redis#exists(key) Warning from redis 4.2.0 #4591
Comments
I plan on releasing Sidekiq 6.1 later this month. I don't want to pick up a minor version bump like this so quick after release; we'll let it sit for a few weeks to let their changes stabilize. |
Waiting to release seems fine to me. It's certainly non-critical. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about this change on the redis gem, really. It seems noisy, to the say the least. Coupled with the proposed 4.3.0 change from returning a boolean to an integer would be breaking (since Anyway, thank you for the response and the fix! |
Any update on this ? |
For now you can update your redis gem to |
@gauravmc Sidekiq 6.1 has been released so I think you can just use that. |
I'm on sidekiq (6.1.0) and Redis (4.2.1) and still seeing this log message |
I upgraded sidekiq to 6.1.1 and I'm not receiving the message any more. |
I'm on Sidekiq (6.1.1) and Redis (4.2.1) and still seeing this log message.
|
You can use nano, vim or vs code to open file and comment line 161 |
@acooxy this is the worst possible advice. You are telling people to comment out lines of code which are there for a reason. Sidekiq will break in unpredictable ways. |
The fix is to get a new version of the redis-namespace gem or stop using it. This issue is not in Sidekiq. |
|
Upgrading sidekiq to 6.1.1 resolved the problem for me, Redis is 4.0.11 |
Ruby version: 2.x
Sidekiq / Pro / Enterprise version(s): 6.0.7
Probably mostly a redis gem issue more than sidekiq, but the latest release today (4.2.0) introduces a warning message:
This message gets repeated endlessly in the sidekiq log files.
It looks as though sidekiq should be using
exists?
rather thanexists
, if I'm reading their messaging correctly.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: