From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp34.i.mail.ru (smtp34.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.94])
 (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 EDA4B42EF5C
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 26 Jun 2020 13:58:36 +0300 (MSK)
References: <cover.1591701695.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
 <3210e1e6f867cfd1c1f65e05f28a32deae63c172.1591701695.git.sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
 <b11d7f6b-0e1e-df06-6487-7d58f2975a8a@tarantool.org>
 <0427f3c8-ed41-6592-a9e7-41dc9836f8d6@tarantool.org>
From: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <a0457171-6270-2496-21f6-226fee5f05dd@tarantool.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 13:58:35 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0427f3c8-ed41-6592-a9e7-41dc9836f8d6@tarantool.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: ru
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 8/8] replication: write and read
 CONFIRM entries
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: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>, sergos@tarantool.org, gorcunov@gmail.com
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org


26.06.2020 01:31, Vladislav Shpilevoy пишет:
> On 26/06/2020 00:04, Vladislav Shpilevoy wrote:
>>> diff --git a/src/box/txn_limbo.c b/src/box/txn_limbo.c
>>> index efb97a591..daec98317 100644
>>> --- a/src/box/txn_limbo.c
>>> +++ b/src/box/txn_limbo.c
>>> @@ -128,12 +128,65 @@ txn_limbo_wait_complete(struct txn_limbo *limbo, struct txn_limbo_entry *entry)
>>> +void
>>> +txn_limbo_read_confirm(struct txn_limbo *limbo, int64_t lsn)
>>> +{
>>> +	assert(limbo->instance_id != REPLICA_ID_NIL &&
>>> +	       limbo->instance_id != instance_id);
>>> +	struct txn_limbo_entry *e, *tmp;
>>> +	rlist_foreach_entry_safe(e, &limbo->queue, in_queue, tmp) {
>>> +		if (e->lsn > lsn)
>>> +			break;
>> What if e->lsn is -1, because its LSN wasn't delivered to TX thread
>> from WAL thread yet?
> Probably not a bug. At least now. Because txn_limbo_read_confirm() is called
> on replica only, where LSN is known from master before it is written to local WAL.
Yes, it's ok for now.

-- 
Serge Petrenko