fix(client): bring disableClientInfo option back

[nkaradzhov]

It disappeared in v5

fixes #2958

---

Checklist

• Does npm test pass with this change (including linting)?
• Is the new or changed code fully tested?
• Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?

[nkaradzhov]

@bobymicroby @htemelski Im not sure if this needs to be done for Sentinel, Cluster as well?

[bobymicroby]

Im not sure if this needs to be done for Sentinel, Cluster as well?

I think Sentinel and Cluster reuse the handshake logic defined in lib/client/index.ts, so you don't have to do something extra.

[nkaradzhov]

@bobymicroby it looks like we are using #handshake in one more place - in the reset function
Im not sure if we need to add the client setinfo commands there as well?

[bobymicroby]

@bobymicroby it looks like we are using #handshake in one more place - in the reset function Im not sure if we need to add the client setinfo commands there as well?

Why don't we refactor the handshake to separate concerns better? We could nest the current command creation logic in a private #createHandshakeCommands method, then have #handshake actually queue these commands and return promises for their completion. Then we can reuse it in reset and the socket initiator. Something like :

diff --git a/packages/client/lib/client/index.ts b/packages/client/lib/client/index.ts
index 5dae1271ec..c6ed508202 100644
--- a/packages/client/lib/client/index.ts
+++ b/packages/client/lib/client/index.ts
@@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ export default class RedisClient<
     });
   }
 
-  async #handshake(selectedDB: number) {
+  async #createHandshakeCommands(selectedDB: number) {
     const commands = [];
     const cp = this.#options?.credentialsProvider;
 
@@ -494,10 +494,38 @@ export default class RedisClient<
         parseArgs(COMMANDS.READONLY)
       );
     }
+    
+    
+    if(this.options?.credentialsProvider) {
+      commands.push()
+    }
 
     return commands;
   }
 
+  async #handshake(selectedDB: number) {
+    const commands = await this.#createHandshakeCommands(selectedDB);
+    const promises = [];
+    const chainId = Symbol('Handshake');
+
+    // Preserve the original reverse order iteration
+    for (let i = commands.length - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
+      promises.push(
+        this.#queue.addCommand(commands[i], {
+          chainId,
+          asap: true
+        })
+      );
+    }
+
+    if (promises.length) {
+      this.#write();
+      return Promise.all(promises);
+    }
+    
+    return Promise.resolve();
+  }
+
   #initiateSocket(): RedisSocket {
     const socketInitiator = async () => {
       const promises = [],
@@ -521,15 +549,8 @@ export default class RedisClient<
         );
       }
 
-      const commands = await this.#handshake(this.#selectedDB);
-      for (let i = commands.length - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
-        promises.push(
-          this.#queue.addCommand(commands[i], {
-            chainId,
-            asap: true
-          })
-        );
-      }
+      const handshakePromise = this.#handshake(this.#selectedDB);
+      promises.push(handshakePromise);
 
       if (promises.length) {
         this.#write();

What do you think ?

[nkaradzhov]

@bobymicroby the option to move the setinfo commands in the #getHandshakeCommands method looks to be the most clean

[bobymicroby]

LGTM

[htemelski]

🚀