Let me clean up my grammar and explanation a bit. I rushed the email
message.
-->-Original Message-
-->From: Dathan Vance Pattishall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-->Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 5:26 PM
-->To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-->Subject: bug in replication?
-->
-->Before I send this to [
Anton kornexl writes:
> >Description:
> If i call get_lock('kornexl',10) in the master (Version 3.23.47), and
> release_lock('kornexl') later, there are no errors in the master.
> The slave (Version 3.23.44) stops with the following error:
> ERROR: 1064 You have an error in your
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 02:28:32PM -0500, Wendell Dingus wrote:
> You might have just hit the nail on the head.. Server1 is
> replicating everything to server2 but it is only saving changes to
> one particular database. Those changes are being manually gathered
> via mysqlbinlog and sent to serve
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug in replication 3.23.46-max
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 10:34:03PM -0500, Wendell Dingus wrote:
>
> I've tried this a bunch of times and different ways and can confirm
> that in the 3-server setup I described an alter table does NOT
> propogate. Can't see i
le?
Jeremy
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:23 PM
> To: Wendell Dingus
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Bug in replication 3.23.46-max
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:59:07PM -0500, Wende
ust adding a
field to a table or similar do not.
Thanks...
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:23 PM
To: Wendell Dingus
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug in replication 3.23.46-max
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:59:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:59:07PM -0500, Wendell Dingus wrote:
>
> I'm fairly certain this is a bug. It's on 3.23.46-max and the
> changelog for .47 doesn't mention it.
>
> I have 2 servers using replication. Server1 is used by client
> machines and all updates are to it. Server2 stays in perfec
