From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 910562BE1F for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:24:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ccQbX4ONhECH for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:24:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp21.mail.ru (smtp21.mail.ru [94.100.179.250]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id 434292B812 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:24:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 19:24:56 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 1/1] swim: keep encoded round message cached Message-ID: <20190411162456.GB7446@chai> References: <573c97faff11b387566fd449c1d1dcbe3e644351.1554893660.git.v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> <20190411135150.GA5480@chai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-post: List-Archive: To: Vladislav Shpilevoy Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org * Vladislav Shpilevoy [19/04/11 19:13]: OK to push. > > Are you going to add anything to this method? If not, please get > > rid of it and inline swim_packet_create() to all relevant places, > > with an appropriate comment. > > I am not going to change it now, but > > 1) I (or anyone else) can change my (their) mind in future. Even > during SWIM development we already did it. I have this patch > since the SWIM implementation was multi-packet, and invalidation > of the cache was different. > > 2) This logic of recreating the packet is too internal to be > inlined in all the usage places. I would rather comment this > function and logic in one encapsulated place, and would just > call it. They can easily re-introduce this function when necessary. -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia, +7 903 626 22 32 http://tarantool.io - www.twitter.com/kostja_osipov