I think what's really being sought after, here is clustering.
--C
Eric Bergen wrote:
Dual master replication can be either dual master dual write or dual
master single writer. The latter is preferred. In this configuration
replication is connected in both directions but clients only ever
connect to one master at a time. It's just as safe as master -> slave
replication if you handle the failover correctly.
-Eric
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Claudio Nanni <claudio.na...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there,
I would only like to stress that the only supported (and recommended)
replication solution in MySQL is
Master--->Slave replication.
In this scenario you can have ONLY one master and (virtually) any number of
slaves.
There is NO other safe replication solution.
The terms you mention seems to refer to the same solution, where you have
two servers each acting as a master:
this is a non standard dangerous scenario in MySQL and requires application
logic awareness.
Hope to have brought a little light in your mind
Cheers
Claudio
Vikram Vaswani wrote:
Hi
I'm new to replication and looking through some docs on how to use it.
Could
someone please tell me if the following terms mean the same thing or, if
not, what is the difference:
master-master replication
dual-master replication
bidirectional replication
TIA
-BT
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=eric.ber...@gmail.com
