From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja@tarantool.org>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 23:28:51 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 1/3] vinyl: fix secondary index
 divergence on update
Message-ID: <20190525202851.GB2340@atlas>
References: <cover.1558733443.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
 <8e4175c3f3b857097ccfd264608b046b71635e91.1558733443.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
 <20190525061157.GB14501@atlas>
 <20190525195119.4bwcu3sp5epm52pr@esperanza>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190525195119.4bwcu3sp5epm52pr@esperanza>
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> [19/05/25 22:55]:
> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 09:11:57AM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote:
> > Could you also please explain why you decided to introduce a new
> > flag, and not use is_overwritten?
> 
> is_overwritten is cleared on rollback while is_nop stays unchanged.

Then shouldn't better name be is_overwriting, as every
is_overwritten txv is overwritten by some is_overwriting txv
(is_nop)? Is there any symmetry between the two or there are cases
when they are unrelated?

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia