whoops! nevermind I just found it. Both of the servers had a server-id of 1.
*blush*
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Mary Bahrami <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If that's the master server's master status, then yes, you want to
> 'change master to' this on the slave and see if it starts.
>
> I
I would run mysql -h 192.168.1.161 -u slave2 -p see if the user name and
password works.
This will also tell us if slave2 can reach your master.
This is only an idea, but you can start over from scratch. Go into your
mysql directory on slave2 delete master.info and relay logs that are
accumulated
If that's the master server's master status, then yes, you want to
'change master to' this on the slave and see if it starts.
If it doesn't I'd take a fresh mysqldump with the --master-data
parameter and refresh the slave, run the 'change master' statement at
the top of the backup and it should st
here's the master status from the master;
mysql> show master status;
+--+--+--+--+
| File | Position | Binlog_Do_DB | Binlog_Ignore_DB |
+--+--+--+--+
| mysql-bin.23 | 98 |
Do you have the original mysql> show slave status\G; off the master?
I have a feeling you have the position wrong. I about 100% sure you have
the position wrong because it happened to me.
if you don't have it do a show slave status\G; and try to remember which one
you took.
Mike
On Mon, Jul 28
Mike,
Yes take a peek here:
mysql> show master status;
+--+--+--+--+
| File | Position | Binlog_Do_DB | Binlog_Ignore_DB |
+--+--+--+--+
| mysql-bin.45 | 98 | exampledb
Did you start from position Exec_Master_Log_Pos 1? Can you tell us the
command you used to get this going?
Mike
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Bryan Irvine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm having an issue setting up a slave Where it doesn't seem to start:
>
> mysql> show master status;
> +---
I'm having an issue setting up a slave Where it doesn't seem to start:
mysql> show master status;
+--+--+--+--+
| File | Position | Binlog_Do_DB | Binlog_Ignore_DB |
+--+--+--+--+
|
John,
Cut out the sql that creates and loads the problem table and run it by
itself to capture the error messages as it loads; I don't know how
you're loading, but in mysql, you could do : tee myload.out; source
tableload.sql; notee;
Then check myload.out for the errorsI had problems with lo
At 03:31 PM 7/27/2008, Kevin Hunter wrote:
At 12:42p -0400 on Sat, 26 Jul 2008, mos wrote:
> At 09:14 AM 7/26/2008, you wrote:
>> The reproducible part is very important, because without it, it's
>> suspect to be just your individual case, as with a bug in *your*
>> application code, your hardwar
hi list,
i have a simple question:
does the constraint id need to be numeric ?
re,
wh
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 07:32 -0400, Gary Josack wrote:
> Andrew Martin wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is it permissible to order a clause such that the search term is the
> > first item (in the clause)?
> >
> > standard:
> > field1 IN (123, 654, 789)
> >
> > in question:
> > 123 IN (field1, field2, field
Andrew Martin wrote:
Hello,
Is it permissible to order a clause such that the search term is the
first item (in the clause)?
standard:
field1 IN (123, 654, 789)
in question:
123 IN (field1, field2, field3)
I am interested to know if the optimizer treats this any differently
if anybody can she
Hello,
Is it permissible to order a clause such that the search term is the
first item (in the clause)?
standard:
field1 IN (123, 654, 789)
in question:
123 IN (field1, field2, field3)
I am interested to know if the optimizer treats this any differently
if anybody can shed any light on it (exce
14 matches
Mail list logo
