On 7 Sep 2010, at 19:17, Marcus Bointon wrote:
> Any other suggestions?
I thought of another option. I could temporarily set up all three in a circle, A -> B
-> C -> A. Restore B's backup on C, let it all catch up, now if I stop replication
on B with C fully caught up, I don't see any reason why I can't use B's slave info as new
master host, position and log for C, thus C would cut B out of the loop and continue
replication without missing any updates from A.
Does that sound sane?
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of http://www.smartmessages.net/
UK resellers of info@hand CRM solutions
marcus@stripped | http://www.synchromedia.co.uk/