From: Marcus Bointon
Date: June 18 2009 3:49pm
Subject: Re: Replicating Archive tables
List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/replication/1651
Message-Id: <8D739526-DEF0-43D7-8336-1C45F3329A71@synchromedia.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 18 Jun 2009, at 16:17, Muthukumar Selvarasu wrote:

> What issue you facing it?
>
> Before you do replication stop the service and do the raw data  
> backup and do
> it.


No particular issues - I've not tried it yet, just wondering about it.  
I'm looking for a mechanism for a logging-style table that will be  
almost 100% writes with very occasional reads. InnoDB seems like  
overkill for that, archive seems a good fit. It's in a 100% InnoDB  
database that's already replicating. Adding it isn't a problem as that  
will just replicate too, I just want to know if there are any gotchas  
regarding its use in that environment.

I would guess that the archive table coupled with mysql 5.1  
partitioning would be a really good solution for some pretty large  
data sets.

Marcus
-- 
Marcus Bointon
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of http://www.smartmessages.net/
UK resellers of info@hand CRM solutions
marcus@stripped | http://www.synchromedia.co.uk/