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

Not all keys showing in explorer tree #91

Open
rickwargo opened this issue Dec 23, 2018 · 5 comments
Open

Not all keys showing in explorer tree #91

rickwargo opened this issue Dec 23, 2018 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@rickwargo
Copy link

After connecting to my Redis database (on AWS), I filter the keys using freqreg:2018122315* as a filter in "Load content of database", however, there is a key that does not show.

You can see in the screenshot it exists, and it did appear when I issued the KEYS command:

factoredis

@topilski topilski self-assigned this Dec 24, 2018
@topilski
Copy link
Member

Hi @rickwargo , i will try to reproduce, thank you for the issue.

@topilski
Copy link
Member

Hi @rickwargo , i think i fixed this issue can you try new release to check it?

@rickwargo
Copy link
Author

Still having issues displaying all the keys. Below is another example. Note it says only (2) keys but there are really 6.
image

@topilski
Copy link
Member

topilski commented Dec 31, 2018

I think i understand your issue, please load all keys 3000, because for tree we using scan command, but you check via KEYS. I think scan loaded only part of keys.

@rickwargo
Copy link
Author

That makes sense. The 1000 limit is confusing here as I would expect them all to appear, but they won't. I like the treeview display, however, I do not think it represents the data accurately unless all data are read.

What about recursively descending each branch to completion instead of grabbing the next N (1000) keys? You may end up in a scenario where N' read is either < N or N' > N, but at least it is visually accurate, except for the last branch. That last branch could either be read to completion, possibly far over-reaching the original limit or it could be removed/not read, possibly under-reaching the limit. Additionally (or alternatively), you could inform the number of keys required to complete a branch.

I don't believe a treeview can be processed linearly; it can recursively traverse the tree.

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

2 participants