Thanks for the answer.

Sent patch as 'Part of' instead of 'Closes'.

>Четверг, 21 ноября 2019, 1:11 +03:00 от Vladislav Shpilevoy < v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org >:
>
>On 20/11/2019 02:29, Ilya Kosarev wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> Thanks for your review.
>> 
>> Did u run tests on exactly this patchset or on the branch,
>>  https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/tree/i.kosarev/gh-4586-fix-quorum-test
>> which also contains relay: fix join vclock obtainment in < https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/commit/83fa385f2e82911dee1a9189f90b1a94c8455023 >
>> relay_initial_join < https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/commit/83fa385f2e82911dee1a9189f90b1a94c8455023 >?
>> It is not yet checked in master (and might not get there, as far as
>> Georgy has alternative fix as a part of sync replication), but
>> is vital for the stability of the test.
>> 
>> On my machine (Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS) quorum test works perfectly on
>> mentioned branch. I use next bash instruction to run it under 'load':
>> l=0 ; while ./test-run.py -j20 `for r in {1..64} ; do echo quorum ; done` 2>/dev/null ; do l=$(($l+1)) ; echo ======== $l ============= ; done
>I run it on your branch, and it fails. Even without these
>complex bash scripts. I run it 5-10 times, and it fails/crashes.
>
>> 
>> Anyway, I guess provided problems are not connected with join_vclock
>> patch but are mac os specific, as far as i can't reproduce them locally.
>> Guess we have some mac os machines, i will ask for access.
>
>Maybe they are not related. But at least the wrong test results mean,
>that the ticket can't be closed. Because ticket is called:
>
>    test: flaky segfault on replication/quorum test under high load
>
>And it is still flaky.
>
>For the crash you can open a new ticket.
>
>> 
>> It seems to me that wrong results problem is quite easy to handle.
>> I have no idea for now how to handle provided segfault, however, i am
>> sure it has nothing to do with the segfault mentioned in the issue, as
>> far as it was caused by unsafe iteration of anon replicas. Other wrong
>> results problems, mentioned in the ticket, are also handled in the
>> patchset.
>
>The problems, mentioned in the ticket, are just comments. Helpers.
>The ticket is about flakiness. Not about several concrete fails. If the
>test is still flaky, what is a point of closing this issue and opening
>exactly the same again?
>
>> 
>> Therefore i propose to close this ticket with the provided patchset
>> although there are some other problems. Then i will open new issue with
>> error info you provided and start to work on it as soon as i get remote
>> access to some mac os machine


-- 
Ilya Kosarev