Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] Trigger on vclock change

[Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>]

* Georgy Kirichenko <georgy@tarantool.org> [19/11/15 09:43]:
> 90% of tarantool core developers are sitting together in one room or just 
> call-available during the day. Also, please, tell us how many RFC responds you 
> saw from a somebody who is not a part of tarantool core team. So, you wish to 
> force the whole team to use only this inconvenient and unproductive (because 
> of long-latency responds) communication way because of your beliefs.
> So I have the another look: each thing to be discussed should be discussed (or 
> brainstormed) verbally (because we are the tarantol TEAM members) first and 
> only then a well-designed RFC could be formed (or, maybe, you wish to have 
> lots of worthless RFCs but I no see any point here).

I gave earlier in this thread concrete examples how active-active
won't work. It didn't take me long. You chose to respond back with
some vague claims and promises of magic.

If you have a miracle design, and you happen to not want to send
an RFC, you still can prove it by sending a patch. Last time it
didn't work: your refused to send an RFC for in-memory WAL - and
the patch can't pass the code review for over 3 months. 

All this suggests that the patch by Maria is simply not worth it. 
Whatever it is needed for may never happen - and even if it
happens, it is most likely the wrong thing to do.

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia