[HN Gopher] Valkey 8.0.0 Is Out
___________________________________________________________________
Valkey 8.0.0 Is Out
Author : schaum
Score : 96 points
Date : 2024-09-18 15:58 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| schaum wrote:
| to my knowledge and understanding it is the first valkey release
| that include features not just bug fixes! This release is fully
| compatible with Redis OSS 7.2.4.
| ezekg wrote:
| Congrats on the v8 release. It's super interesting to see that
| Heroku now uses Valkey instead of Redis [0], with no notes re:
| compatibility yet.
|
| Yet another project to add to the books of successful forks re:
| rug-pull?
|
| [0]: https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/heroku-redis
| federationfive wrote:
| Heroku cant use OSS Redis anymore because of the license change
| to prevent Cloud vendors from running OSS Redis and charging
| for it
| ezekg wrote:
| My point was that Redis' bet on cloud vendors paying them
| seems to be failing.
| kelsey98765431 wrote:
| When will these money hungry vultures realize that you
| cannot transition a foss "brand" into a proprietary system
| no matter how you pitch the tree tier? You can't have your
| name recognition and eat it too. These groups don't realize
| that "NewThing from the developers of Redis" holds so much
| more weight than "Redis is now closed source and you have
| to pay for it"? There is a net negative value in detonating
| the bomb that is a license change versus making something
| new and throwing the existing name's support behind it.
| Just look at literally every well known license changed
| software becoming irrelevant while the foss fork with a new
| name has no problem getting traction? Just look at the
| graveyard of Solaris, OpenOffice and others. The open
| source community deeply despises these relicensing scams
| and has proven time and time again not to fall for ignorant
| consumer brand identity marketing tactics?
| phoronixrly wrote:
| My guy, the money-hungry vultures are more so the ones
| exploiting open-source without contributing anything back
| -- not even financially, let alone development or
| maintenance.
|
| It's high time permissive OSS licenses died together with
| free maintenance and support.
| toenail wrote:
| Both sides are leeching off somebody, one off a project
| that picked the wrong license, and the other off
| contributors who were mislead about a project's licensing
| intentions.
| phoronixrly wrote:
| Oh, by no means am I belittling the rug-pull performed on
| the unpaid/non-commissioned? contributors.
| wmf wrote:
| These companies are backed into a corner. Even if they
| "realize" that they are doomed the investors won't allow
| them to just shut down.
|
| _" NewThing from the developers of Redis" holds so much
| more weight than "Redis is now closed source and you have
| to pay for it"_
|
| I disagree with this part. The problem we're now seeing
| with open core is that almost everybody just wants the
| core. They don't want enterprise. They don't want the new
| thing.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| In this case, it's "Valkey, from the developers of
| Redis", and everybody wants the new thing. Because the
| people working on Valkey are in fact the people who
| worked on Redis before it went proprietary.
| wmf wrote:
| I don't think that was kelsey98765431's point. Of course
| people want the free thing. If Redis Labs released a new
| _commercial_ thing, people do not want it regardless of
| the name.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| I'm not suggesting it was kelsey98765431's point (though
| the thought crossed my mind that they _might_ have been
| going for that). I was observing the irony that
|
| > These groups don't realize that "NewThing from the
| developers of Redis" holds so much more weight than
| "Redis is now closed source and you have to pay for it"?
|
| is in fact exactly what happened in this case, because
| NewThing is Valkey, it _is_ from the developers of Redis,
| and that has indeed carried so much more weight.
| rsstack wrote:
| It is unfortunately not failing them ("unfortunately"
| because I very much dislike the path they took). They lost
| Heroku, which also didn't pay them before the license
| change, but they got others. I don't know if the
| information is public.
| bloppe wrote:
| I'm torn on the moral issues of the re-licensing, but I'm
| firmly happy about the practical implications. Redis vs.
| Valkey is as competitive as it gets, since users can
| switch between the two so seamlessly (for now, at least).
| That's good for the industry. I expect to see a flurry of
| improvements to both in the coming years as they try to
| come out on top (some may be redundant, but I nonetheless
| think the pace will be faster).
| ezekg wrote:
| Yeah, I guess I'm speaking from a sample size of 1 here
| since they don't share this information (and I'm too lazy
| to look around at what other cloud vendors are doing
| i.r.t. Valkey vs Reddit).
|
| What "others" did they get, that you're aware of?
| reconditerose wrote:
| * Google added support to Valkey:
| https://cloud.google.com/memorystore
|
| * AWS says they are moving:
| https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/why-aws-supports-
| val...
|
| * Aiven added Valkey: https://aiven.io/blog/introducing-
| aiven-for-valkey
|
| * Instaclustr mentioned moving:
| https://www.instaclustr.com/blog/redis-to-valkey/
|
| * Oracle indicated support:
| https://blogs.oracle.com/cloud-
| infrastructure/post/oracle-su...
|
| Azure is the main one sticking with Redis:
| https://azure.microsoft.com/de-de/blog/redis-license-
| update-...
|
| I might edit this if I remember some more.
| rmbyrro wrote:
| And that's why the OS movement matters so much.
|
| Otherwise, Redis users would pretty soon be as miserable as
| Oracle users.
| wmf wrote:
| Nah, Redis users would just keep using the last free version.
| Probably many of them will do that anyway because they missed
| the memo about Valkey. Like the poor people still using
| OpenOffice.
| vander_elst wrote:
| Has anyone used valkey in production? How does it compare to
| redis? Can it be used as a 1:1 replacement to redis or are there
| any caveats?
| jjice wrote:
| Haven't tried it in prod myself, but they claim full
| compatibility:
|
| > This release is fully compatible with Redis OSS 7.2.4.
| bloppe wrote:
| They only forked 5 months ago. Assuming you haven't adopted any
| brand new non-backward-compatible features in the last 5
| months, then it should be a perfect drop-in replacement.
| forbiddenlake wrote:
| If you upgraded to 7.4, then redis switched to a proprietary
| dump format, and if you want to use those dumps you'll have to
| use a third-party tool to dump the data and put it back in
| valkey.
|
| https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/845#issuecomment-...
| reconditerose wrote:
| I'm from the project.
|
| There shouldn't be any caveats of replacing Redis 7.2 and early
| to Valkey 8.0. I've talked with a few folks who have migrated
| and none so far have hit any issues, one even migrated from
| Redis 2.6.
| rowanseymour wrote:
| Hope to see this as an option in Elasticache soon. Feels like
| Valkey has the momentum over Redis now. Less sure about
| OpenSearch vs Elasticsearch...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-18 23:01 UTC)