From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com (mail-lj1-f193.google.com
 [209.85.208.193])
 (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 49931469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat,  7 Mar 2020 00:41:48 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id 19so933070ljj.7
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:41:48 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 00:41:45 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200306214145.GB27301@uranus>
References: <20200305122943.7324-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200305122943.7324-10-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20200306213743.GI8140@atlas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200306213743.GI8140@atlas>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 09/10] box/journal:
 journal_entry_new -- drop setting up callbacks
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: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>, tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>

On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 12:37:43AM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote:
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> [20/03/05 15:32]:
> > The callbacks gonna be different from sync and async
> > commits thus lets untangle it from journal_entry_new
> > interface but setup explicitly.
> > 
> > I think setting up NULLs for entry is a safe approach
> > so we can allow us to spend a few cycles.
> 
> This is a hot path. 

You mean to not setup NULL here? Maybe with Debug build only?

> I don't see much value in this patch, but I don't think it
> makes much of a difference either way.
> 
> My preference is to drop this patch, just pass different
> call backs from different call sites.

I don't mind to rework.

Kotya, there is a problem in this series. In one test case

[cyrill@uranus test] ./test-run.py replication/gc.test.lua
...
[002] replication/gc.test.lua                         memtx           [ pass ]
...

But vinyl test case fails

2020-03-07 00:35:51.116 [6494] main/136/applier/unix/:/home/cyrill/sda1 I> subscribed
2020-03-07 00:35:51.116 [6494] main/136/applier/unix/:/home/cyrill/sda1 I> remote vclock {1: 782} local vclock {1: 382}
tarantool: /home/cyrill/sda1/tarantool/tarantool.git/src/box/vy_tx.c:803: void vy_tx_commit(struct vy_tx *, int64_t): Assertion `xm->lsn <= lsn' failed.
[001] replication/gc.test.lua                         vinyl           
[001] 
[001] [Instance "replica" killed by signal: 6 (SIGABRT)]
[001] Found assertion fail in the results file [/home/cyrill/sda1/tarantool/tarantool.git/test/var/001_replication/replica.log]:
[001] [ fail ]
[Main process] Got failed test; gently terminate all workers...
---

Actually somtimes it pass, sometime fails. And I didn't find out why, yet. Investigating...