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 1913F2DDE9 for ; Sat, 25 May 2019 16:32:17 -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 FdH44YDTeMKd for ; Sat, 25 May 2019 16:32:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp34.i.mail.ru (smtp34.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.94]) (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 CBB792DD76 for ; Sat, 25 May 2019 16:32:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 23:26:03 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH v1 06/21] sql: remove SQL_NOTFOUND error/status code Message-ID: <20190525202603.GA2340@atlas> References: <4E2824A4-6F08-4539-9954-EF9783217D54@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4E2824A4-6F08-4539-9954-EF9783217D54@tarantool.org> 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: tarantool-patches@freelists.org Cc: Imeev Mergen * n.pettik [19/05/25 21:58]: > Taking into consideration assert above, it could > be replaced with assert(pBuilder->nRecValid == nEq - 1); > Btw, this function doesn’t seem to be called at all: > unreachable() assert doesn’t fire. I can assume that it is > connected with stat tables. > NIkita, could you please be more specific, is it an accept or a reject? Can review comments be done in their own patches? This is a big patch stack and I would like us to stop shuffling it around. If it does improve things, let it get in please and do the follow up work separately. Or at least let some of the good patches in. -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia