From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alyapunov@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp17.mail.ru (smtp17.mail.ru [94.100.176.154])
 (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 1AC3242EF5C
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Mon, 22 Jun 2020 17:13:33 +0300 (MSK)
References: <cover.1586808463.git.korablev@tarantool.org>
 <0bdc1b5e-82b4-2e24-ad06-26587b007742@tarantool.org>
 <20200522024206.GA24698@tarantool.org>
From: Aleksandr Lyapunov <alyapunov@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <9820269f-95a1-4d11-c08f-c2dd2b642740@tarantool.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 17:13:31 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200522024206.GA24698@tarantool.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 0/2] Validate result of upserts
 squash & skip invalid upserts which can't be applied
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: Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org>, Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

HI, thanks for the patch! see one comment below

On 5/22/20 5:42 AM, Nikita Pettik wrote:
>
> diff --git a/src/box/vinyl.c b/src/box/vinyl.c
> index 55a4c8fb7..b39e3b9d8 100644
> --- a/src/box/vinyl.c
> +++ b/src/box/vinyl.c
> @@ -3539,10 +3539,21 @@ vy_squash_process(struct vy_squash *squash)
>                  if (vy_tuple_compare(result, mem_stmt, lsm->cmp_def) != 0 ||
>                      vy_stmt_type(mem_stmt) != IPROTO_UPSERT)
>                          break;
> -               assert(vy_stmt_lsn(mem_stmt) >= MAX_LSN);
> -               vy_stmt_set_n_upserts((struct tuple *)mem_stmt, n_upserts);
> -               if (n_upserts <= VY_UPSERT_THRESHOLD)
> -                       ++n_upserts;
> +               /*
> +                * Upsert was not applied in vy_history_apply(),
> +                * but it still resides in tree memory. Ignore
> +                * such statements and do not account them while
> +                * counting upserts. Otherwise invalid upserts will
> +                * get stack and won't allow other upserts to squash.
> +                */
> +               if (vy_stmt_lsn(mem_stmt) >= MAX_LSN) {
> +                       vy_stmt_set_n_upserts((struct tuple *) mem_stmt,
> +                                             n_upserts);
> +                       if (n_upserts <= VY_UPSERT_THRESHOLD)
> +                               ++n_upserts;
> +               } else {
> +                       vy_stmt_set_n_upserts((struct tuple *) mem_stmt, 0);
> +               }
I bet we should just remove assert here. If mem_stmt have
a valid LSN now - it is a valid statement. The first of them must
have n_upserts=0, the second - 1 etc, and n_upsert of following
prepared statements must continue the sequence.