feat: implement WAIT command as no-op #420
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 02:01:51AM -0700, aroullet wrote:
Implements the [`WAIT` command](https://valkey.io/commands/wait/) as a no-op that always returns `0` if the syntax is respected.
Thanks! I'll have a look soon.
|
alicebob
reviewed
Sep 29, 2025
aroullet
force-pushed
the
feat/implement_no_op_wait_command
branch
from
f99d3b0 to
4a52c05
Compare
aroullet
force-pushed
the
feat/implement_no_op_wait_command
branch
from
4a52c05 to
796cd5b
Compare
|
Sorry for the delay and thanks for the PR! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Implements the
WAITcommand as a no-op that always returns0if the syntax is respected.Motivation
I have started using the WAIT command in parts of my application which now prevents me from using
miniredisto test the logic. I would just need the command not to fail to fit my use case, does that sounds reasonable to you?