From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja.osipov@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 5A0104696C3
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat, 28 Mar 2020 08:57:47 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id p10so12214566ljn.1
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 27 Mar 2020 22:57:47 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 08:57:44 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200328055744.GA23207@atlas>
References: <cover.1585303629.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
 <56c1a9001fafcd7525fdd3c6a68be2760b095532.1585303629.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56c1a9001fafcd7525fdd3c6a68be2760b095532.1585303629.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v4 2/4] replication: hide 0-th
 vclock components in replication responses
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: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org

* Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org> [20/03/27 18:08]:
> If an anonymous replica is promoted to a normal one and becomes
> replication master later, its vclock contains a non-empty zero
> component, tracking local changes on this replica from the time when it
> had been anonymous. No need to pollute joining instance's vclock with
> our non-empty 0 component.
> When an anonymous replica reports its status to a remote instance it
> should also hide its 0-th vclock component.
> 
> This is needed for backward compatibility with old instances, which
> don't ignore 0th vclock component coming from a remote instance by
> default.
> Also make sure that new instances ignore 0th vclock component.

If you added vclock_compare_ignore0, suggest to introduce and use 
vclock_copy_ignore0 instead of a pair vclock_copy + vclock_reset.

Where was vclock_compare_ignore0 introduced, did I miss the
patch?

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia