--log-slave-updates did the job. Regards,
-----Original Message----- From: Sanjeev Sagar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 9/10/2004 3:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Local Master replication issue Hello All, I am seeing a small problem in Ring replication where one slave is acting as Local Master. See below M - Super Master S1/LM1 - Slave of super Master and act as Local Master for S2 S2 - slave of LM1 I ran one Insert on M, it showd up on S1/LM1 but it did not showed up in S2. What I can see that S1 I/O thread bring that transaction in relay log on S1 and apply it but it did not consider as write on s1/LM1 resulting that binlog do not have record of it. Since binlog do not hast it, so it did not replicate to S2. Am I missing anything here? As per our requirement that transaction should also showed up in S2 too? It's obivious to think that make S2 as direct slave of M but it is not accepted because things r bit complicated here. Is there any specific configuration thing to acheive a slave as local master for another slave. Any help will be highly appreciable. Regards,
