Discrepancy in INFO response parsing
#3262
Assignees
Comments
gerzse
added a commit
to gerzse/redis-py
that referenced
this issue
Jun 5, 2024
If the INFO response contains a single `a=b` value for any of the keys, that must also be parsed into a dictionary. Fixes redis#3262
gerzse
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 5, 2024
If the INFO response contains a single `a=b` value for any of the keys, that must also be parsed into a dictionary. Fixes #3262 Co-authored-by: Gabriel Erzse <gabriel.erzse@redis.com>
gerzse
added a commit
to gerzse/redis-py
that referenced
this issue
Jun 5, 2024
If the INFO response contains a single `a=b` value for any of the keys, that must also be parsed into a dictionary. Fixes redis#3262
gerzse
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 5, 2024
If the INFO response contains a single `a=b` value for any of the keys, that must also be parsed into a dictionary. Fixes #3262 Co-authored-by: Gabriel Erzse <gabriel.erzse@redis.com>
agnesnatasya
pushed a commit
to agnesnatasya/redis-py
that referenced
this issue
Jul 20, 2024
If the INFO response contains a single `a=b` value for any of the keys, that must also be parsed into a dictionary. Fixes redis#3262 Co-authored-by: Gabriel Erzse <gabriel.erzse@redis.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Version:
5.0.0Description: The code for parsing the
INFOresponse is creating a discrepancy in the new RediSearch index field types field, e.g.,search_fields_text.If there is more than one section to this field its corresponding value (e.g.,
TEXT=1, SORTABLE=1) is returned as a dictionary (as expected), while if there is only one value for it (e.g.,TEXT=1) it is returned as a string!This is bad since we later use this value assuming that it is a dictionary, and thus face failures in the case that it is not.
The wanted behavior: We always get a dictionary back, whether we have only one section for this value or more.
Example: We have one section for the
TEXTfield, and two for theTAGfield, and this is what we get:The source of the problem is in the
parse_info()function, here.Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: