> -----Original Message-----
> From: Devananda [mailto:karnah805@stripped]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 17:13
> To: Jeff
> Cc: mysql@stripped
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> Jeff wrote:
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Alec.Cawley@stripped [mailto:Alec.Cawley@stripped]
> >>Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:10
> >>To: jakes.dad@stripped
> >>Cc: mysql@stripped
> >>Subject: Re: Circular Replication
> >>
> >>
> >>Sid Lane <jakes.dad@stripped> wrote on 19/09/2005 15:02:58:
> >>
> >>
> >>>stupid ?:
> >>>
> >>>what keeps them from getting caught in a write loop? turning off
> >>>log_slave_updates?
> >>>
> >>>I had never thought of this but is has intriging possibilities...
> >>
> >>Each update is marked with the unique server id of the server which
> >>originated it. When the update returns to its originating
> >>server, it is
> >>dropped instead of being executed. That is why every server
> >>must have a
> >>unique id.
> >>
> >> Alec
> >>
> >
> >
> > Actually, isn't it required that you start each server with
> > --log_slave_updates?
> >
> > Or is that only necessary in a replication situation like this with
> > more than 2 servers?
> >
> > A -> B -> C -> A
> >
> > If it's just:
> >
> > A -> B -> A
> >
> > Is it necessary to start the servers with --log_slave_updates?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> >
>
> log-slave-updates causes the server to write to it's own binlog any
> statements it read from it's master's binlog. This is necessary in
> chains of servers (ie, A->B->C->A); in such chains, it is
> necessary that
> all servers have BOTH log-bin and log-slave-updates.
>
> With just 2 servers (A->B->A), you need log-bin, but do not need
> log-slave-updates.
>
> Regards,
> Devananda vdv
>
Muchos Gracias!
