From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja@tarantool.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 21:46:45 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] wal: delete old wal files when running out of
 disk space
Message-ID: <20181023184645.GC29694@chai>
References: <cover.1540314925.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
 <b66dae8eff853b628a2d9f0fd44af4ae6b1ac142.1540314925.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b66dae8eff853b628a2d9f0fd44af4ae6b1ac142.1540314925.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org
List-ID: <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>

* Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com> [18/10/23 20:30]:
> +static void
> +gc_process_wal_event(struct wal_watcher_msg *msg)
> +{
> +	if ((msg->events & WAL_EVENT_GC) == 0)
> +		return;

GC is now subscribed to all events only to react to those *gc*
events which delete wal files in case of emergency.

Shouldn't gc ignore wal gc events which were initiated by
wal_collect_garbage() at least?
Why send wal_event_gc for these events?

wal watcher api is an artefact from the times when we had no
cbus connection between wal and tx. Now you can send a direct
message to gc. Why use wal watcher api at all?


-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia, +7 903 626 22 32
http://tarantool.io - www.twitter.com/kostja_osipov