Marcus Bointon wrote:
> On 31 Oct 2007, at 15:56, Oriol Capsada wrote:
>> At this point my1 does not contain the information of the insert1
>> because it has been deleted (it was replicated from my2), but it is
>> contained in the my2. Now we have an inconsistency...
> That's not a replication problem, it's a transaction problem. If those
> statements were wrapped in a a transaction, either all of them or none
> of them would happen, thus avoiding your problem altogether.
> I use circular replication a lot for this kind of stuff because I can
> switch my clients between masters at any time and then restart the
> inactive master to pick up new settings without any downtime.
I understand you, but it's not possible to aggregate the statements in
one transaction, as it's not really the same transaction.
I suppose that I'll have to reboot the master and have some downtime.