[Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3 1/2] vinyl: rework upsert operation
Aleksandr Lyapunov
alyapunov at tarantool.org
Tue Oct 13 22:00:27 MSK 2020
Hi, thanks for the patch! Se my 2 comments below:
(the second seems to be important)
Once they resolved, the whole patch is LGTM!
On 10/3/20 4:28 PM, Nikita Pettik wrote:
> into insert the upsert's tuple and the tuple stored in index can be
> different In our particular case, tuple stored on disk has two fields
Dot before `In` is missing.
> + /*
> + * If it turns out that resulting tuple modifies primary
> + * key, then simply ignore this upsert.
> + */
> + if (stmt != NULL &&
> + vy_apply_result_does_cross_pk(stmt, exec_res,
> + exec_res + mp_size, cmp_def,
> + column_mask)) {
I guess in case if `stmt_is_void = true` we must compare with `upsert`
tuple,
not with `stmt` tuple.
> + if (!suppress_error) {
> + say_error("upsert operations %s are not applied"\
> + " due to primary key modification",
> + mp_str(ups_ops));
> + }
> + ups_ops = ups_ops_end;
> + continue;
> + }
> + ups_ops = ups_ops_end;
> + /*
> + * Result statement must satisfy space's format. Since upsert's
> + * tuple correctness is already checked in vy_upsert(), let's
> + * use its format to provide result verification.
> + */
> + struct tuple_format *format = tuple_format(upsert);
> + if (tuple_validate_raw(format, exec_res) != 0) {
> + if (! suppress_error)
> + diag_log();
> + continue;
> + }
> + result_mp = exec_res;
> + result_mp_end = exec_res + mp_size;
> + }
> + struct tuple *new_terminal_stmt = vy_stmt_new_replace(format, result_mp,
> + result_mp_end);
> + region_truncate(region, region_svp);
> + if (new_terminal_stmt == NULL)
> + return NULL;
> + vy_stmt_set_lsn(new_terminal_stmt, vy_stmt_lsn(upsert));
> + return new_terminal_stmt;
> +}
More information about the Tarantool-patches
mailing list