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 CA61F2FDED for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:45:57 -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 7kcDl5DpFCIZ for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:45:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp32.i.mail.ru (smtp32.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.92]) (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 093102FCEC for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:45:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smtp32.i.mail.ru with esmtpa (envelope-from ) id 1hd6wN-0002n3-6C for tarantool-patches@freelists.org; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:45:55 +0300 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:45:54 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH] vinyl: fix assertion failure in vy_tx_handle_deferred_delete Message-ID: <20190618054554.GB26661@atlas> References: 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: tarantool-patches@freelists.org * Vladimir Davydov [19/06/17 19:08]: > vy_tx_handle_deferred_delete() expects (righteously) that in case a > deferred DELETE overwrites a statement in a secondary index write set > and the overwritten statement wasn't skipped on commit (i.e. doesn't > have txv->is_overwritten flag set), both the old and the new statement > must be REPLACEs (see the comment to the corresponding assertions for > more details). > > The problem is we don't set is_overwritten flag in case a statement > doesn't have any effect (txv->is_nop is set), even if it was, in fact, > overwritten in the primary index write set (see vy_tx_prepare). As > a result, we get an assertion failure when we delete such statement > in the same transaction, e.g. lgtm -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia