Skip to content
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

feature request: valkey support #69

Open
ac130kz opened this issue Aug 21, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

feature request: valkey support #69

ac130kz opened this issue Aug 21, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@ac130kz
Copy link

ac130kz commented Aug 21, 2024

As you all probably know, Redis has changed its license, giving major corporations and contributors all the incentive to make a move to Linux Foundation's new project Valkey. So far the migration to valkey-py process seems to be quite straightforward, so I wonder, if it would be possible to implement its support.

@s3rius
Copy link
Member

s3rius commented Aug 26, 2024

I don't think it's necessary. At least for now. Because valkey and other technologies as a KeyDB are basically drop-in replacements for redis. The taskiq-redis is not affected by this issue, since the underlying library still has an MIT license and can be used without any issue.

@ac130kz
Copy link
Author

ac130kz commented Aug 26, 2024

Understandable, it's just that taskiq-redis has a hard dependency on redis-py. The problem that I see in the nearest year or so is compatibility with official redis is going to be less and less of the concern of fork maintainers. Well, I guess we have to wait and see.

@ItsCurstin
Copy link

ItsCurstin commented Oct 9, 2024

Hi, I second this request. While it may be a drop-in placement for now redis and valkey will most likely diverge. And it seems like ValKey is the alternative that is been pushed forward the most compared to the other redis forks. Since bigger companies are investing into it

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants