Hello,
I also plan to use two servers such that each is a master for the other.
A -> B
B -> A
Unless you tell me otherwise, the log-server-updates option
will not be used.
Seems to work in a small test I've conducted.
In fact this setup will be used for reasons of high availability.
(rather t
Bhavin,
> Is there a way to have DB-A and DB-B such that DB-A is the master and DB-B
Can't help you with the replication question - but here is a replication
answer - have everyone in your installation repeat after me: "the DBA is
your master"! (and say it again...and again...)
=dn
List fodder
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 10:35:06PM -0700, Bhavin Vyas wrote:
> Is there a way to have DB-A and DB-B such that DB-A is the master and DB-B
> is the slave. However, I also want to make DB-B the master and DB-A it's
> slave so that if I have to fail over to DB-B then DB-A is automatically
> followin
* Bhavin Vyas
> Is there a way to have DB-A and DB-B such that DB-A is the master and DB-B
> is the slave. However, I also want to make DB-B the master and DB-A it's
> slave so that if I have to fail over to DB-B then DB-A is automatically
> following the changes. It doesn't seem probable that thi
No can do. Replication is one-way.
You can, however, have multiple Slaves.
- Original Message -
From: "Bhavin Vyas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 12:35 AM
Subject: Replication Circle
Hello,
Is there a way to have DB-A and DB-B such that DB-A
