maria-developers team mailing list archive

[Nirbhay Choubey <nirbhay@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Svoj,

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Sergey Vojtovich <svoj@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Nirbhay,
>
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 09:00:27AM -0400, Nirbhay Choubey wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/sql/log_event.cc b/sql/log_event.cc
> > > > index afa58af..66e7c60 100644
> > > > --- a/sql/log_event.cc
> > > > +++ b/sql/log_event.cc
> > > > @@ -6022,7 +6022,7 @@ int Load_log_event::do_apply_event(NET* net,
> > > rpl_group_info *rgi,
> > > >    new_db.str= (char *) rpl_filter->get_rewrite_db(db,
> &new_db.length);
> > > >    thd->set_db(new_db.str, new_db.length);
> > > >    DBUG_ASSERT(thd->query() == 0);
> > > > -  thd->reset_query_inner();                    // Should not be
> needed
> > > > +  if (thd->query()) thd->reset_query();         // Should not be
> needed
> > > Why if? Original code didn't have it.
> > >
> >
> > Now that we call reset_query(), the check has been added to avoid it and
> an
> > extra mutex.
> > And from the above assert, I think it will be ever better have this check
> > within unlikely().
> Taking into account this assert I'd say there's no point in reset_query at
> all.
>

Ok, I will remove it.

- Nirbhay


> _______________________________________________
> commits mailing list
> commits@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.askmonty.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/commits