From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp59.i.mail.ru (smtp59.i.mail.ru [217.69.128.39]) (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 1C0A1469719 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:58:25 +0300 (MSK) References: <743a25a986ebbe4388d8f6ffc7d1502f20a5efb9.1601729099.git.korablev@tarantool.org> <343c3a98-2eec-1d3b-797b-77ed76c304bb@tarantool.org> <20201014001531.GA20094@tarantool.org> From: Aleksandr Lyapunov Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:58:24 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201014001531.GA20094@tarantool.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3 1/2] vinyl: rework upsert operation List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nikita Pettik Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org > if (stmt_is_void) { > ups_cnt--; > mp_next(&ups_ops); > + stmt = vy_stmt_new_replace(tuple_format(upsert), result_mp, > + result_mp_end); Why can't you just use `upsert` tuple itself instead of created tuple by its format and data?