Mathieu Bruneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In the section on Seconds_Behind_Master, first it says: > > > > When the slave SQL thread is actively running (processing updates), > > this field is the number of seconds that have elapsed since the > > timestamp of the most recent event on the master executed by that thread. > > This is generally true and accepted, the important part to read here is > "actively running". Which leads to the other paragraph: [...] > So if the SQL_THREAD isn't executing anything he will report "0" in > "Seconds_behinds_master". If you think about it, it make sense because > he doesn't have any "master" timestamp to base his calculation on. So > the warning applies here, it's not because your SQL_THREAD report 0 > seconds behind master, that means he's caught up with the master, it > simply means it's caught up with the IO_THREAD. If the io_thread is > lagging, there's no current way of knowing it
Ahah. So "processing updates" does *not* include monitoring the relay log for new material, and if it sees nothing new in the relay log it reports 0. Thanks. -- Cos -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
