| ▲ | greenavocado 9 hours ago |
| My theory is Redis is trying to take control over all popular libraries that interface with it so it can break protocol level compatibility to force vendor lock-in |
|
| ▲ | mperham 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| That would push everyone to valkey. They want to add proprietary features supported only by their server and client. That's the extend part of "embrace, extend, extinguish". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... |
| |
| ▲ | greenavocado 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Some cash cows would remain stuck and they are ultimately the ones that would be milked for profit even if 95% of the community leaves | |
| ▲ | gorjusborg 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | All of this drama is already doing that. |
|
|
| ▲ | bhouston 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| My theory as well. I would almost bet on it. Redis is risking its reputation in order to solidify its revenue stream in the face is rising threats like Valkey, etc. |
| |
| ▲ | skeledrew 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well it's either solidify revenue stream or likely go out of business. And what's a reputation if there's no business to attach it to? | | |
|
|
| ▲ | papruapap 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Are there many redis drop-ins alternatives? |
| |
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Valkey, dragonfly, kvrocks are all protocol-compatible and mostly drop-in replacements for upstream Redis. If you want something hosted/managed, there’s Upstash Redis (though I reckon they’ll soon have to change the name of that offering). | | | |
| ▲ | whstl 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Valkey is the fork/drop-in replacement from the Linux Foundation. |
|
