From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com (mail-lf1-f66.google.com [209.85.167.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B4F7438E31 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 08:57:27 +0300 (MSK) Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id r2so16332429lfn.8 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 22:57:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 08:57:25 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov Message-ID: <20191016055725.GB16587@atlas> References: <20191015213405.GB898@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191015213405.GB898@tarantool.org> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [tarantool-patches] [PATCH v1 0/9] schema: rework _trigger space List-Id: Tarantool development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nikita Pettik Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org * Nikita Pettik [19/10/16 08:45]: > Personally I've already said (see [dev] [rfc] Persistent triggers in Tarantool > thread) that I do not support idea of storing both Lua and SQL trigger's > metadata in one space. Well, we can not reach the point not only because we have different opinions, but because the discussion is so slow. The reason to store all persistent objects of the same type in the same space is that Tarantool is designed as a multiple frontend system. I.e. tomorrow there may be another front end, not just Lua or SQL, and one doesn't want to have a separate table for each front end. If the trigger timing, action type, definer, setuid and other semantics is the same, and only the language is different, then why duplicate the space? Whenever we add a new property common to all triggers (e.g. persist enabled/disabled), we'll have to do extra work. -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia