From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <korablev@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256
 bits)) (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED91143D678
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Mon, 14 Oct 2019 20:10:55 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 20:10:54 +0300
From: Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <20191014171053.GC30792@tarantool.org>
References: <cover.1568637869.git.kshcherbatov@tarantool.org>
 <1104a40d34d785d4c436bb390241bcd3b29e7c23.1568637869.git.kshcherbatov@tarantool.org>
 <20190920071922.GD8859@atlas>
 <b7b6342f-b689-a959-e2a5-cef81f5f3f34@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b7b6342f-b689-a959-e2a5-cef81f5f3f34@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] sql:
 use name instead of function pointer for UDF
List-Id: Tarantool development <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Kirill Shcherbatov <kshcherbatov@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

On 07 Oct 17:21, Kirill Shcherbatov wrote:
> > 
> > Usually we protect pointers with schema_version, rather than avoid
> > them at all. Please take a look how iterators work.
> > 
> 
> We've discussed this question in T. and decided that current approach is ok except the
> necessity to rename OP_Function to OP_FunctionByName. Done.
> 
> ===========================================
> 
> This patch changes OP_Function parameters convention: now a
> function's name is passed instead of pointer to the function
> object. This allows to normally handle the situation, when UDF
> has been deleted to the moment of the VDBE code execution.
> In particular case this may happen with CK constraints that
> refers to a deleted persistent function.
> ---

Could you add test case covering mentioned situation?