maria-discuss team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: testing Galera
Jan Kirchhoff <j.kirchhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I didn't know of that function, good to hear that.
> But I was after some kind of slave_skip_counter-like function to make
> galera skip an event in case of problems. I'm fine with a cluster member
> stopping (or going read-only or something like that) because some update
> couldn't be applied, but if I (for whatever reason) think that's OK and
> just want it to skip that event, how could I do that?
I'm sorry, I quoted the wrong piece of your original email, which may have
created some confusion.
I meant to comment on this:
> application connects to all databases, sets SQL_LOG_BIN=0 and then
> starts updating just a few tables (up to 15-20GB of pure sql statements
> per hour depending on the time of the day). This works fine, the server
> was processing the statements no slower than the other non-galera servers.
> I couldn't see the updates on the second galera-server and figured that
> was because of the SQL_LOG_BIN=0. Now things got complicated. How to
My point was - you can maybe avoid the problem that SQL_LOG_BIN=0 makes the
updates not be seen on other galera servers. SKIP_REPLICATION=1 works similar
to SQL_LOG_BIN=0, in that it makes the statements not be replicated. But with
SKIP_REPLICATION=1, data is still written to the binlog, so I thought the
missing update problem would be solved for galera.
Unfortunately, I do not know about the slave_skip_counter and galera.