Johan,
You state that master - master is not reliable in dual active environments.
I am in the process of setting up just such an environment (moderate active
on the primary server, lighter activity on the other server.) Do you know
where I can get some information on the risks?
Thanks,
Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Johan De Meersman" <vegivamp@stripped>
To: "short cutter" <shortcutter@stripped>
Cc: "Brent Clark" <brentgclarklist@stripped>; <mysql@stripped>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: Master Master Replication ... do a fail over and a week agos
data is revealed.
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:48 AM, short cutter <shortcutter@stripped> wrote:
>
>> 2010/10/18 Brent Clark <brentgclarklist@stripped>:
>> > Hiya
>> >
>> > I run MySQL Master - Master Replication. Ive had an interesting
>> > situation
>> > whereby I failed over using heartbeat but whats is interesting is that
>> via
>> > the application (vbulletin), I see that the forums was showing that a
>> weeks
>> > ago data.
>> >
>>
>> Why using M-M replication?
>> The book of "High performance Mysql" says it is not a reliable mechanism.
>>
>
> There's various reasons why - almost all my setups also use it. It's not a
> reliable mechanism for dual-active setups, but as a hot standby there's
> nothing wrong with it whatsoever. Read the book again :-)
>
> I don't have a straight explanation about why the secondary master offers
> data from a week ago, though. If replication is running, maybe there's
> something going on with the binlogging on the primary ? Check the
> primary's
> master status and the secondary's slave status; check what's in the
> primary's binlogs and in the secondary's relay logs; if need be check the
> traffic that goes over the replication interface.
>
>
> --
> Bier met grenadyn
> Is als mosterd by den wyn
> Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel
> Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
>
