Sorry for the late reply, I'm trying to juggle too many things currently.
It is good that you managed to solve your problem, but there is still something
that seems strange that I would like to make you aware of.
Yuan Wang wrote:
> Hi Mats
> I have checked the code of 5.1 (current head version of 5.1 branch in
> launchpad), and it don't seem to fill missing attributes automatically
> when RBR is used.
> The patch (http://lists.mysql.com/commits/40151) of bug 33055
> (http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=33055) does the following change to
> - if (file->ha_table_flags() & HA_PRIMARY_KEY_REQUIRED_FOR_DELETE)
> + if (file->ha_table_flags() & HA_PRIMARY_KEY_REQUIRED_FOR_DELETE ||
> + mysql_bin_log.is_open() && in_use &&
> + in_use->current_stmt_binlog_row_based)
> This patch has been pushed into 6.0. However,
> st_table::mar_columns_needed_for_update don't have this change.
That is correct, and the reason is because there were a patch pushed to 6.0 to
make Falcon work correctly that made row-based replication only replicate the
columns that are explicitly marked, but no other.
However, for 5.1, the full row is written to the binary log regardless of what
columns that are marked in the write_set.
You can see this in the binlog_log_row function, where the columns are set in
the following code (I marked the line):
If there are no table maps written to the binary log, this is
the first row handled in this statement. In that case, we need
to write table maps for all locked tables to the binary log.
if (likely(!(error= bitmap_init(&cols,
use_bitbuf ? bitbuf : NULL,
(n_fields + 7) & ~7UL,
if (likely(!(error= write_locked_table_maps(thd))))
error= (*log_func)(thd, table, table->file->has_transactions(),
> It seems that if my storage engine mark the
> HA_PRIMARY_KEY_REQUIRED_FOR_DELETE flag in table_flags, then the
> server will add primary key to binlog automatically, which is just
> what we need.
Yes, that is correct, but I am still surprised that it affects replication, for
the reason given above.
Just my few cents,
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Mats Kindahl <mats@stripped> wrote:
>> Hi Yuan,
>> In 5.1, the full row is sent over to the slave, so I am a little surprised that
>> there is anything missing at all.
>> Do you have an example I can look at?
>> Best wishes,
>> Mats Kindahl
>> Yuan Wang wrote:
>>> We are developed a storage engine using row based replication. During
>>> the test we found that primary key values will not be included in the
>>> binlog event. So the slave is impossible to identify which row to
>>> Is this a bug or is there a flag to tell MySQL to include primary key?
>>> We are based on 5.1.33 currently.
>> Mats Kindahl
>> Senior Software Engineer
>> Database Technology Group
>> Sun Microsystems
Senior Software Engineer
Database Technology Group