From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <arkholga@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp44.i.mail.ru (smtp44.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.104])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AAEF46970E
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 19 Dec 2019 17:45:11 +0300 (MSK)
References: <20191219134126.25839-1-arkholga@tarantool.org>
 <20191219141445.GA26708@atlas>
From: Olga Arkhangelskaia <arkholga@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <4350dbf5-6fcd-634b-fc28-6eb2df288ca0@tarantool.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 17:45:10 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191219141445.GA26708@atlas>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3] memtx: fix out of memory
	handling for rtree
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>, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

On 19/12/2019 17:14, Konstantin Osipov wrote:
> * Olga Arkhangelskaia <arkholga@tarantool.org> [19/12/19 16:44]:
>> When tarantool tries to recover rtree from a snapshot and memtx_memory value
>> is lower than it has been when the snapshot was created, server suffers from
>> segmentation fault. This happens because there is no out of memory error
>> handling in rtree lib. In another words, we do not check the result of
>> malloc operation.
>> The execution flow in case of recovery uses different way and the secondary
>> keys are build in batches. There is no separate implementations for rtree of
>> build_next function. And the way with no checks and reservation is used
>> (insex_replace). The patch adds memtx_rtree_build_next implementation to
>> check and insert keys. Although this gives us no additional optimization as in
>> case of memtx_tree, the memory reservation prevents tarantool from segmentation
>> fault.
>> If there is not enough memory to be reserved - server will fail
>> gently with the "Failed to allocate" error message.
> Why not add memtx_index_extent_reserve() to
> generic_index_build_next(), this would be a shorter version which
> does the same thing?
>
>
I can't agree - everything that has memtx_ should be in memtx, because 
generic is used by vinyl, and sysview.

And the only way I see do it generic - is to use index_reserve? Did you 
mean index_reserve, that has  memtx_index_extent_reserve( inside?

In this case it is not shorter.