Rick points out the distinction in your inserts between:
-- Scenario A
insert into DB_NAME.table values('foo);
-- And Scenario B
use DB_NAME;
insert into table values('foo');
Be sure and review this
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/replication-options-slave.html
and this
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/replication-rules.html
Ensure you have the do-wild statements in your slave configurations and then try doing two inserts of the above styles and see the differences.
Shawn
Quote
'From the Manual'
--replicate-wild-do-table=db_name.tbl_name
Tells the slave thread to restrict replication to statements where any of the updated tables match the specified database and table name patterns. Patterns can contain the “%” and “_” wildcard characters, which have the same meaning as for the LIKE pattern-matching operator. To specify more than one table, use this option multiple times, once for each table. This works for cross-database updates. See Section 16.2.3, “How Servers Evaluate Replication Filtering Rules”.
This option applies to tables, views, and triggers. It does not apply to stored procedures and functions, or events. To filter statements operating on the latter objects, use one or more of the --replicate-*-db options.
Example: --replicate-wild-do-table=foo%.bar% replicates only updates that use a table where the database name starts with foo and the table name starts with bar.
If the table name pattern is %, it matches any table name and the option also applies to database-level statements (CREATE DATABASE, DROP DATABASE, and ALTER DATABASE). For example, if you use --replicate-wild-do-table=foo%.%, database-level statements are replicated if the database name matches the pattern foo%.
To include literal wildcard characters in the database or table name patterns, escape them with a backslash. For example, to replicate all tables of a database that is named my_own%db, but not replicate tables from the my1ownAABCdb database, you should escape the “_” and “%” characters like this: --replicate-wild-do-table=my\_own\%db. If you use the option on the command line, you might need to double the backslashes or quote the option value, depending on your command interpreter. For example, with the bash shell, you would need to type --replicate-wild-do-table=my\\_own\\%db.
Quote
'Also from the manual'
Row-based replication. Tells the slave SQL thread to restrict replication to database db_name. Only tables belonging to db_name are changed; the current database has no effect on this. Suppose that the slave is started with --replicate-do-db=sales and row-based replication is in effect, and then the following statements are run on the master:
USE prices;
UPDATE sales.february SET amount=amount+100;
The february table in the sales database on the slave is changed in accordance with the UPDATE statement; this occurs whether or not the USE statement was issued. However, issuing the following statements on the master has no effect on the slave when using row-based replication and --replicate-do-db=sales:
USE prices;
UPDATE prices.march SET amount=amount-25;
Even if the statement USE prices were changed to USE sales, the UPDATE statement's effects would still not be replicated.
Another important difference in how --replicate-do-db is handled in statement-based replication as opposed to row-based replication occurs with regard to statements that refer to multiple databases. Suppose that the slave is started with --replicate-do-db=db1, and the following statements are executed on the master:
USE db1;
UPDATE db1.table1 SET col1 = 10, db2.table2 SET col2 = 20;
If you are using statement-based replication, then both tables are updated on the slave. However, when using row-based replication, only table1 is affected on the slave; since table2 is in a different database, table2 on the slave is not changed by the UPDATE. Now suppose that, instead of the USE db1 statement, a USE db4 statement had been used:
USE db4;
UPDATE db1.table1 SET col1 = 10, db2.table2 SET col2 = 20;
In this case, the UPDATE statement would have no effect on the slave when using statement-based replication. However, if you are using row-based replication, the UPDATE would change table1 on the slave, but not table2—in other words, only tables in the database named by --replicate-do-db are changed, and the choice of default database has no effect on this behavior.
If you need cross-database updates to work, use --replicate-wild-do-table=db_name.% instead. See Section 16.2.3, “How Servers Evaluate Replication Filtering Rules”.