Re: Table types in replication

2002-07-19 Thread Jeremy Zawodny
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 04:40:39PM +0100, Pete French wrote: Maybe BDB tables are not for me after all... Yeah, just go with InnoDB. :-) -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 3.23.51: up 50 days, processed

Re: Re: Table types in replication

2002-07-19 Thread Pete French
Yeah, just go with InnoDB. :-) any good ? I took a look at the documentation, but it all seemed somewhat heavyweight for my liking... I have an application that runs very nicely at the moment - we have one minor problem which is that we have one insert into two tables which may not hapen

Re: Table types in replication

2002-07-18 Thread Ralf Narozny
Hello! Pete French wrote: If I have amast/salve pair where the slave is replicating from the master then do the table types have to be the same ? Specifically can I have a myisam table on the master and replicate to a bdb table on the slave ? The reasoning behind this is to try and find a

Re: Table types in replication

2002-07-18 Thread Pete French
CREATE TABLE new_table (all like your current one, besides indexes) TYPE=BDB; INSERT INTO new_table SELECT * FROM old_table; CREATE INDEX ... ON new_table;... ALTER TABLE new_table ADD PRIMARY KEY (...);... RENAME old_table TO old_table_bak; RENAME new_table TO old_table; That should