On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:18:33AM -0700, Sasha Pachev wrote:
>
> The cleanest way to do the above is to extend the client protocol,
> not just the slave. We plan to do this in 4.0, however, if you
> cannot wait until we do it, here is the basic outline:
>
> * add a connection redirect response when redirect on update is
> requested to COM_QUERY in the client protocol with mysql_query()
> automatically executing the query on a different connection if it
> gets a redirect
> * add the code in the slave to respond with a redirect to the current
> master if the query is an update and redirect option is set
What about the case where a slave can communicate with the master, but
clients of the slave can NOT communicate with the master (because of
firewall setups)?
Security folks like this setup because the number of slaves is fairly
static. They are easy to keep track of. But the clients could be any
machines behind the firewall.
I'm likely to be in a situation like that, but would like the make use
of the transparent update when it becomes available. Is is possible to
have the slave communicate with the master on behalf of the client?
Thoughts?
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny, <jzawodn@stripped>
Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance
Desk: (408) 328-7878 Fax: (408) 530-5454
Cell: (408) 439-9951
