MySQL Forums
Forum List  »  Replication

My problem is different
Posted by: Alon Lubin
Date: February 12, 2009 10:13AM

Hi Rick,
Thanks for your reply.

My problem is with the decision to work in row-based logging for "read committed" isolation level while "repeatable read" works in statement based replications.
The problem is not with the amount of rows, but with translation into full rows delete in the binary log.

I don't think read-committed is less safe than repeatable read for this issue.

In addition, the delete statement in the log contains all the columns of the deleted table and not the primary key columns, which leads to even bigger log waste.

We hit a major IO problem on our slaves for simple delete statements.
The delete statement if to be executed on the slave as delete should not take more than few seconds, while replicating the specific deletes takes forever.

Thanks, Alon.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject
Views
Written By
Posted
3248
February 11, 2009 05:12AM
1905
February 11, 2009 05:17AM
1989
February 11, 2009 06:15AM
My problem is different
1993
February 12, 2009 10:13AM
2096
February 13, 2009 11:26PM
1905
February 18, 2009 04:07AM
1820
February 19, 2009 12:34AM
1842
February 19, 2009 11:21AM
1789
February 20, 2009 12:49AM


Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.

Content reproduced on this site is the property of the respective copyright holders. It is not reviewed in advance by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Oracle or any other party.