From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from [87.239.111.99] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD8270200; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:40:46 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 dev.tarantool.org 2CD8270200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tarantool.org; s=dev; t=1612089646; bh=r85yGU5KQDxEonVWn+FKZiEi0VoO6A31wJXm7Ji4ImU=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=NccXYbRTdYVldpH6CSAWGXttJeODa/mONGjqDPqb4tIIeOj8FhhI0ZScjqep5KjoP UqWkCwq2zxVWr0YPMXWw3QStMEf1Syadw+xnlUzG9by1siipbFMsZ4vlO/J1epglPD HcLQ3YBmPjxUbLWRHQkcwOl3LfQu1cJsKIPsw5/M= Received: from mail-lj1-f181.google.com (mail-lj1-f181.google.com [209.85.208.181]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B03C670200 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:40:45 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 dev.tarantool.org B03C670200 Received: by mail-lj1-f181.google.com with SMTP id e18so15834339lja.12 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:40:45 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KnYqb72xvQ1T/9E/frE9/ob0OJUqRAfzEsoO2JeSRks=; b=q/P0zcuT5QLJ7ir/7PtDWPGcGv3MCptRKFNwCz2V9Wnwj8BNt7HoCb1oKjqOheFJJp IzTxpHa03xZ2qidCxa+1Y2BmiwH4ERved5FjXrEKa4IIDa/gRAbTwi03PVgm5r/PAUlS luDaqBXNdIR5VQa7PhtMa5Qh/yG7dgQ95ZK5VPPaJpntq1ukE3ajVDCMo52W/X9vdjQp 2Rb/RO85uBt9gn7yXV2GuNejlQWgfSJEjQaMl/RBr7UFh5ro7BRHataLeYVxZPTKgMvN ExkN7TlEIdzaz7gdxmyJBTnH9oqVVpWuTVBFut6txZJCbDhL1wxeRIKA5ChlDURtEejU o0QA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5315oTXufJp/mgnt2Vyv1M1QhtNICo1auDZnfQexrNYnLs6cWRmI Q7NfSuxq8DGxoHUiIBJWC6WQEYPVBrBmwQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSH3LBq3ZlwocvB9dRoSSBzAKix5iKFNfsgRKAzbOKYdHyFvwd44Itn3VNiczrAi53kmKWGQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:575d:: with SMTP id r29mr7374498ljd.175.1612089644586; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:40:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from grain.localdomain ([5.18.103.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s28sm3322905ljo.26.2021.01.31.02.40.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:40:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by grain.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7F91F560113; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:40:42 +0300 (MSK) Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:40:42 +0300 To: Vladislav Shpilevoy Cc: tml Message-ID: <20210131104042.GA2172@grain> References: <20210122132700.272816-1-gorcunov@gmail.com> <20210122132700.272816-4-gorcunov@gmail.com> <03d851a9-d0c1-9db1-1a1e-61d474a10369@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <03d851a9-d0c1-9db1-1a1e-61d474a10369@tarantool.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.6 (2020-07-11) Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 3/6] test/unit: snap_quorum_delay -- stop using txn_set_flag X-BeenThere: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches Reply-To: Cyrill Gorcunov Errors-To: tarantool-patches-bounces@dev.tarantool.org Sender: "Tarantool-patches" On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 08:17:57PM +0100, Vladislav Shpilevoy wrote: > Hi! Thanks for the patch! > > Ok, I assume it is fine to drop these functions one by one, even > though it leaves the flags usage inconsistent between the commits. The flags usage remains consistent in terms of operations. > > But why the hell did you split even one function clearance into 2 > commits? Why couldn't this commit be a part of the previous commit? Because I don't know down to which branch the patches gonna be merged. IOW, txn flags are appeared a way earlier than syncrho tests. Thus one can simply skip this patch when backporting the commits. > > Any why couldn't you delete the unused txn_..._flag() helpers along > with their usage? This is better done in one commit when everything is ready. I prefer this way, though there is no strict rule and if you promote immediate function zapping then I can update the series.