Hello.
There's a lot of complains that usually slave is far behind the master. However, the distance between them usually is not so large. Could it be that your laptop much is weaker or not that tuned compared to the server, and the same operation takes more time? As I know replication thread executes queries one by one while the normal process could run faster perform bulk inserts for example. There could be a lot of reasons. Nico Alberti wrote: > Hi everybody. > > Is it normal that, after a massive number (300.000) of INSERTs on the > master server (that however did not take more than some minutes), my > laptop that acts as a slave needs hours to catch up? The logfile was > almost instantly transferred, but the INSERTs at the slave server seem > to really take too much. > > I am just curious, nothing else (that's why I don't post more > informations), because the slave is only a test machine, but I would > like to know a little more about replica and a relative high amount of > data modifications. > > Thank you in advance for your help. > --=20 > Ciao > Nico > -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.NET http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ ____ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Gleb Paharenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.NET <___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
