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 ACE83469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:00:26 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id f13so7973593ljp.0
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:00:24 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200312200024.GA11476@atlas>
References: <20191114115020.21091-1-maria.khaydich@tarantool.org>
 <1583942274.319390956@f377.i.mail.ru>
 <20200312132931.GA30900@atlas> <1584041112.66796082@f172.i.mail.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <1584041112.66796082@f172.i.mail.ru>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/2] box: make box.cfg idempotent
 function
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: Maria Khaydich <maria.khaydich@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

* Maria Khaydich <maria.khaydich@tarantool.org> [20/03/12 22:26]:
> >> Calling box.cfg{} more than once does not normally cause any errors
> >> (even though it might not have any effect). In contrast, assigning
> >> it to some variable and then using it after the box was configured
> >> caused an error since the method was overwritten by the initial call
> >> of <load_cfg>.
> >>  
> >> The patch fixes this issue making box.cfg behave consistently in both
> >> scenarios and is a follow-up for box: make box.execute idempotent function.
> >
> >Did you benchmark it?
>  
> Do you think we need to? There’s basically one extra condition
> in the patch. I don’t see how it might degrade performance.

It's not a one more condition, it's one more FFI C call.

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia