"Robinson, Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/05/2004 16:29:34:
> It is there. Look for "two-way" :-)
>
> >I don't think they do... A search of the documentation for
> >"2-way" yields nothing.
I presume you mean http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Replication_FAQ.html
That is the simplest example of what I have called circular replication.
There is, so far as I can see, no suggestion that such replication is
tolerant to network failures. On the contrary, it points out that there are
problems with guaranteeing atomicity in such circumstances, and the general
tone of the section is "you can do it if you want, but we don't advise it".
This, it seems to me, an informal use of the term "two-way" in a FAQ, not a
formal claim to two-way replication under all cirrcumstances. Circular
replication is, genrally speaking, a very fragile structure. When designing
my own high-availability stratagy, I discarded it and used only liner
replication. However, in my system, on a failure of the master, the slave
becomes master and when the master returns to service, the whole database
has to be recopied to the ex-master, now slave.
Alec
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
