You could have a look at the more recent 5.1 releases, those support semi-synchronous replication iirc.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Tompkins Neil < neil.tompk...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your quick response. > > Basically our need for replication is because our websites access a local > MySQL database - which is fine. In our remote office, we also need to > access this MySQL database too however the connect time/ query speed is > very > slow. At the moment the application in the office needs to update certain > fields (not all). Therefore I thought we'd look into using replication. > > In your opinion what is the best method for us to use ? > > Cheers > Neil > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Mark Goodge <m...@good-stuff.co.uk> > wrote: > > > On 24/06/2010 09:18, Tompkins Neil wrote: > > > >> HI, > >> > >> We have set-up MySQL Community Server 5.1.46 with Master to Slave > >> replication and everything appears to be working correctly, however I > have > >> a > >> couple of questions which I hope somebody can shed some light. > >> > >> (1) When the network connection goes down between the master and slave > >> servers, it would appear that the updates are only sent from the master > to > >> the slave, but not from the slave to the master when the connect is > >> re-established. Is this correct ? > >> > > > > Yes. Replication is one-way by default. If you want two-way replication > you > > have to set it up explicitly with both servers simultaneously acting as > both > > master and slave. > > > > > > (2) What is the situation regarding conflicts if the same master and > slave > >> record is edited at the same time ? > >> > > > > You shouldn't normally edit records on the slave while it's acting as a > > slave. Replication has two main functions: to provide a "hot backup" of > the > > master so that you can switch to the slave as the new master instantly > > should the master fail, and to allow load balancing by performing all > reads > > on the slave (or multiple slaves) and updating only the master (eg, where > > you have a web cluster with each web server having its own MySQL instance > > acting as a slave from a central master updated from your CMS). > > > > Two-way replication is possible, but there are rarely any significant > > benefits from it. If you do use two-way replication, you have to > implement > > locking at the application level as MySQL doesn't provide it natively. > > > > See the replication FAQ for more information: > > > > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/replication-faq.html > > > > Mark > > -- > > http://mark.goodge.co.uk > > > > -- > > MySQL General Mailing List > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > > To unsubscribe: > > http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=neil.tompk...@googlemail.com > > > > > -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
