From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lj1-f196.google.com (mail-lj1-f196.google.com
 [209.85.208.196])
 (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 6443E469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat, 15 Feb 2020 21:51:51 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id d10so14329858ljl.9
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 21:51:49 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200215185149.GF19902@atlas>
References: <20200214140339.4085-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200214140339.4085-4-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200215173741.GC19902@atlas> <20200215182459.GD2527@uranus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200215182459.GD2527@uranus>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v10 3/4] box/applier: prevent nil
 dereference on applier rollback
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <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: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>

* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> [20/02/15 21:26]:
> > It would be nice to explain in the comment why you want to
> > preserve the original error in the fiber here: because when later
> > this fiber is joined in (add call site here), we may want to check
> > its diagnostics area.
> 
> You know I think we might need to drop replicaset.diag completely
> and use applier.diag instead.

I don't mind, but that could be too intrusive for a bug fix.

I still don't see why you can't patch the crash site - i.e. the
place which joins the fiber with broken diag?


Let me remind you that this is just a regression from the parallel
applier patch, and not a big one - just a coding bug. So let's fix
the coding bug first and refactor the patch second.

> understand this code yet, so I need more time to come with some
> clean solution (which I plan to implement on the top).
> 
> > 
> > >  	/* Broadcast the rollback event across all appliers. */
> > >  	trigger_run(&replicaset.applier.on_rollback, event);
> > >  	/* Rollback applier vclock to the committed one. */


-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia