Row-row based logging in a blackhole replication filter setup?
I am using two MySQL server instances on the same server to filter replication to a third external server. My filter slave is using the blackhole engine as described here: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/blackhole-storage-engine.html
Both master and slave use statement based replication. The documentation says:
Inserts into a BLACKHOLE table do not store any data, but if statement
based binary logging is enabled, the SQL statements are logged and
replicated to slave servers. This can be useful as a repeater or
filter mechanism.
The above statement makes me assume that if I had both of my MySQL instances set to row based replication, nothing would make it to the third, external database. Which kind of makes sense since there are no actual rows in the filtering blackhole database.
However, I have been thinking... Would it not be possible for the filtering middle instance to simply pass on any row based instructions it receives to its own binlog, i.e. would a row-row filtering blackhole setup not work?
mysql replication master-slave-replication
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
I am using two MySQL server instances on the same server to filter replication to a third external server. My filter slave is using the blackhole engine as described here: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/blackhole-storage-engine.html
Both master and slave use statement based replication. The documentation says:
Inserts into a BLACKHOLE table do not store any data, but if statement
based binary logging is enabled, the SQL statements are logged and
replicated to slave servers. This can be useful as a repeater or
filter mechanism.
The above statement makes me assume that if I had both of my MySQL instances set to row based replication, nothing would make it to the third, external database. Which kind of makes sense since there are no actual rows in the filtering blackhole database.
However, I have been thinking... Would it not be possible for the filtering middle instance to simply pass on any row based instructions it receives to its own binlog, i.e. would a row-row filtering blackhole setup not work?
mysql replication master-slave-replication
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
I am using two MySQL server instances on the same server to filter replication to a third external server. My filter slave is using the blackhole engine as described here: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/blackhole-storage-engine.html
Both master and slave use statement based replication. The documentation says:
Inserts into a BLACKHOLE table do not store any data, but if statement
based binary logging is enabled, the SQL statements are logged and
replicated to slave servers. This can be useful as a repeater or
filter mechanism.
The above statement makes me assume that if I had both of my MySQL instances set to row based replication, nothing would make it to the third, external database. Which kind of makes sense since there are no actual rows in the filtering blackhole database.
However, I have been thinking... Would it not be possible for the filtering middle instance to simply pass on any row based instructions it receives to its own binlog, i.e. would a row-row filtering blackhole setup not work?
mysql replication master-slave-replication
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
I am using two MySQL server instances on the same server to filter replication to a third external server. My filter slave is using the blackhole engine as described here: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/blackhole-storage-engine.html
Both master and slave use statement based replication. The documentation says:
Inserts into a BLACKHOLE table do not store any data, but if statement
based binary logging is enabled, the SQL statements are logged and
replicated to slave servers. This can be useful as a repeater or
filter mechanism.
The above statement makes me assume that if I had both of my MySQL instances set to row based replication, nothing would make it to the third, external database. Which kind of makes sense since there are no actual rows in the filtering blackhole database.
However, I have been thinking... Would it not be possible for the filtering middle instance to simply pass on any row based instructions it receives to its own binlog, i.e. would a row-row filtering blackhole setup not work?
mysql replication master-slave-replication
mysql replication master-slave-replication
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
edited Apr 23 '18 at 8:55
Istvan Dupai
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
asked Apr 23 '18 at 8:25
Istvan DupaiIstvan Dupai
65
65
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 6 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-features-blackhole.html -->
The BLACKHOLE storage engine accepts data but discards it and does not store it. When performing binary logging, all inserts to such tables are always logged, regardless of the logging format in use. Updates and deletes are handled differently depending on whether statement based or row based logging is in use. With the statement based logging format, all statements affecting BLACKHOLE tables are logged, but their effects ignored. When using row-based logging, updates and deletes to such tables are simply skipped—they are not written to the binary log. A warning is logged whenever this occurs.
For this reason we recommend when you replicate to tables using the BLACKHOLE storage engine that you have the binlog_format server variable set to STATEMENT, and not to either ROW or MIXED.
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "182"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f204676%2frow-row-based-logging-in-a-blackhole-replication-filter-setup%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-features-blackhole.html -->
The BLACKHOLE storage engine accepts data but discards it and does not store it. When performing binary logging, all inserts to such tables are always logged, regardless of the logging format in use. Updates and deletes are handled differently depending on whether statement based or row based logging is in use. With the statement based logging format, all statements affecting BLACKHOLE tables are logged, but their effects ignored. When using row-based logging, updates and deletes to such tables are simply skipped—they are not written to the binary log. A warning is logged whenever this occurs.
For this reason we recommend when you replicate to tables using the BLACKHOLE storage engine that you have the binlog_format server variable set to STATEMENT, and not to either ROW or MIXED.
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
add a comment |
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-features-blackhole.html -->
The BLACKHOLE storage engine accepts data but discards it and does not store it. When performing binary logging, all inserts to such tables are always logged, regardless of the logging format in use. Updates and deletes are handled differently depending on whether statement based or row based logging is in use. With the statement based logging format, all statements affecting BLACKHOLE tables are logged, but their effects ignored. When using row-based logging, updates and deletes to such tables are simply skipped—they are not written to the binary log. A warning is logged whenever this occurs.
For this reason we recommend when you replicate to tables using the BLACKHOLE storage engine that you have the binlog_format server variable set to STATEMENT, and not to either ROW or MIXED.
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
add a comment |
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-features-blackhole.html -->
The BLACKHOLE storage engine accepts data but discards it and does not store it. When performing binary logging, all inserts to such tables are always logged, regardless of the logging format in use. Updates and deletes are handled differently depending on whether statement based or row based logging is in use. With the statement based logging format, all statements affecting BLACKHOLE tables are logged, but their effects ignored. When using row-based logging, updates and deletes to such tables are simply skipped—they are not written to the binary log. A warning is logged whenever this occurs.
For this reason we recommend when you replicate to tables using the BLACKHOLE storage engine that you have the binlog_format server variable set to STATEMENT, and not to either ROW or MIXED.
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-features-blackhole.html -->
The BLACKHOLE storage engine accepts data but discards it and does not store it. When performing binary logging, all inserts to such tables are always logged, regardless of the logging format in use. Updates and deletes are handled differently depending on whether statement based or row based logging is in use. With the statement based logging format, all statements affecting BLACKHOLE tables are logged, but their effects ignored. When using row-based logging, updates and deletes to such tables are simply skipped—they are not written to the binary log. A warning is logged whenever this occurs.
For this reason we recommend when you replicate to tables using the BLACKHOLE storage engine that you have the binlog_format server variable set to STATEMENT, and not to either ROW or MIXED.
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
answered May 8 '18 at 4:54
Rick JamesRick James
43.1k22259
43.1k22259
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
add a comment |
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
Your quote - of course - is correct, but does not answer my intended question. I understand that due to the way MySQL is programmed, row-row replication will not work with a blackhole engine. But why was it not implemented to work with it? In theory, it seems straightforward.
– Istvan Dupai
Jul 2 '18 at 11:26
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f204676%2frow-row-based-logging-in-a-blackhole-replication-filter-setup%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
