From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149]) (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 7B4624696C3 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 20:02:46 +0300 (MSK) References: <65798b71932c21183072decd2cce8b2b0f88b884.1585773275.git.alexander.turenko@tarantool.org> <78056845-c72f-f97e-de62-2f04baaed0e0@tarantool.org> <20200403233859.57lre4ef6co22g3e@tkn_work_nb> <61a72f34-7bd0-576e-e305-dfee085ca724@tarantool.org> <20200405120544.sktsaxfczlkz4ehq@tkn_work_nb.domru> <26b560a7-886b-30e9-58aa-fb4f3b26e559@tarantool.org> <20200406113935.fu3zli6s5x4dusgb@tkn_work_nb> <20200419162245.3gi4l43ye4ypkw5e@tkn_work_nb> From: Vladislav Shpilevoy Message-ID: Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 19:02:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200419162245.3gi4l43ye4ypkw5e@tkn_work_nb> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] net.box: fix fetching of schema of an old version List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Turenko Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org On 19/04/2020 18:22, Alexander Turenko wrote: > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:39:37PM +0300, Alexander Turenko wrote: >>>>> The test and the bug are still upgrade related. 'xlog/upgrade' is not >>>>> called 'xlog/upgrade_called'. It is called just 'upgrade'. For all cases >>>>> when an old snapshot is used to start a new tarantool. >>>> >>>> I disagree here. 'upgrade' is not something about working upward an old >>>> snapshot. >>> >>> It is. Because you won't work on the old snapshot forever. You are >>> going to upgrade anyway. Your bug is for when upgrade is started but >>> not finished. Because Tarantools are new, but upgrade() is not called >>> yet. >> >> It is like "sooner or later a user will use feature X after Y, so let's >> call Y as X". I understood your point, but still think that the name >> 'upgrade' is misleading. More general 'snap' or 'snapshots' looks better >> for me. >> >> In fact upgrade may break old connectors (say, due to unicode_ci >> collation of _func on 2.2) and I guess the old schema may be kept for >> quite long time so. > > We should agree on some name for directory(-ies) with snapshots for > testing purposes. > > I think that stored snapshots may be used to test various scenarious: > > * Start from a snapshot with old schema and data, then call upgrade and > test a scenario. > * Start from a snapshot with old schema and some data, then test a > scenario. > * Start from a snapshot that is broken by a past upgrade (see #4804), > then test a scenario. > * Start from a broken snapshot and test a scenario: > - A snapshot that violates some constraint (and so is hard to be > generated on demand), see #4797. > - A snapshot that has broken metainformation: instance uuid, vclock. > > So I would prefer a name that is more general then 'upgrade': 'snap', > 'snapshots'. > > Aren't this convince you? > > WBR, Alexander Turenko. Snap looks ok. If it will be used consistently and everywhere.