Comments on: MySQL: RENAME TABLE on Transactional Tables Can Jeopardize Slave Data http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1285/mysql-rename-table-on-transactional-tables-can-jeopardize-slave-data News and views from Pythian DBAs Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:01:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Rob Wultsch http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1285/mysql-rename-table-on-transactional-tables-can-jeopardize-slave-data#comment-288203 Rob Wultsch Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:40:06 +0000 http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1285/mysql-rename-table-on-transactional-tables-can-jeopardize-slave-data#comment-288203 Tangential: "If MySQL encounters any errors in a multiple-table rename, it does a reverse rename for all renamed tables to return everything to its original state. " I notice that earlier this week and have been curious about what happens if the reverse rename fails. I bet it is nothing good. I'll write up a test case over the weekend... Tangential:
“If MySQL encounters any errors in a multiple-table rename, it does a reverse rename for all renamed tables to return everything to its original state. ”

I notice that earlier this week and have been curious about what happens if the reverse rename fails. I bet it is nothing good. I’ll write up a test case over the weekend…

]]> By: Gregory Haase http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1285/mysql-rename-table-on-transactional-tables-can-jeopardize-slave-data#comment-288196 Gregory Haase Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:20:18 +0000 http://www.pythian.com/blogs/1285/mysql-rename-table-on-transactional-tables-can-jeopardize-slave-data#comment-288196 I don't know if this is the kind of work-around you're looking for, but I used to have a similar problem with keeping my archive tables small. The solution is to use partitioning and drop older partitions instead. Maybe your client isn't on 5.1 yet, but that's going to be GA a lot sooner than 6.0. You can see my article about pruning archive tables with partitions here: http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/partitioning-event_scheduler.html I don’t know if this is the kind of work-around you’re looking for, but I used to have a similar problem with keeping my archive tables small. The solution is to use partitioning and drop older partitions instead.

Maybe your client isn’t on 5.1 yet, but that’s going to be GA a lot sooner than 6.0.

You can see my article about pruning archive tables with partitions here: http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/partitioning-event_scheduler.html

]]>