<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Online Verification That Master and Slaves are in Sync</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pythian.com/news/4397/online-verification-that-master-and-slaves-are-in-sync/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/4397/online-verification-that-master-and-slaves-are-in-sync/</link>
	<description>News and views from Pythian DBAs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:01:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Log Buffer #197, A Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs &#124; The Pythian Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/4397/online-verification-that-master-and-slaves-are-in-sync/#comment-448247</link>
		<dc:creator>Log Buffer #197, A Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs &#124; The Pythian Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pythian.com/news/?p=4397#comment-448247</guid>
		<description>[...] introduction and power, and Part 2 talks about partitioning. Another, explains Pythian&#8217;s method for continuously verifying replication sync, and lastly is a farewell post, as Sheeri forks off&#8230;. Pythian wishes Sheeri all the best in [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] introduction and power, and Part 2 talks about partitioning. Another, explains Pythian&#8217;s method for continuously verifying replication sync, and lastly is a farewell post, as Sheeri forks off&#8230;. Pythian wishes Sheeri all the best in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Callaghan</title>
		<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/4397/online-verification-that-master-and-slaves-are-in-sync/#comment-447581</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Callaghan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pythian.com/news/?p=4397#comment-447581</guid>
		<description>Master crashes are not a problem with sync_binlog=1 and InnoDB. Slave crashes are the problem. For that you need transactional replication from one of the many InnoDB forks/patches.

I wrote about a 4.0 to 5.0 upgrade at http://mysqlha.blogspot.com/2008/02/upgrading-from-mysql-40-to-mysql-50.html. We were able to avoid data drift, but that took some work. 

As in most MySQL issues, if you have really high expectations/demands from it, then you need to bring in the consultants or hire them full time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Master crashes are not a problem with sync_binlog=1 and InnoDB. Slave crashes are the problem. For that you need transactional replication from one of the many InnoDB forks/patches.</p>
<p>I wrote about a 4.0 to 5.0 upgrade at <a href="http://mysqlha.blogspot.com/2008/02/upgrading-from-mysql-40-to-mysql-50.html" rel="nofollow">http://mysqlha.blogspot.com/2008/02/upgrading-from-mysql-40-to-mysql-50.html</a>. We were able to avoid data drift, but that took some work. </p>
<p>As in most MySQL issues, if you have really high expectations/demands from it, then you need to bring in the consultants or hire them full time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark R</title>
		<link>http://www.pythian.com/news/4397/online-verification-that-master-and-slaves-are-in-sync/#comment-447541</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pythian.com/news/?p=4397#comment-447541</guid>
		<description>I should warn people who think it&#039;s cool to do SHOW CREATE TABLE on the master &amp; slave, and compare the results, that it doesn&#039;t always return foreign key constraints in the same order.

It appears that the order FK constraints are returned is nondeterminstic, so your comparison will have to take this into account; I wrote a perl script to (hackily) parse out the constraints, sort them, and append at the end. This means I can still see if they are wrong on the slave, but won&#039;t notice if they are in a different order.

Finally, if you thought you could run a different version on a slave, forget it. When you run a different MySQL version (even minor), all bets are off, especially in statement-based mode.

We found that migrating from 4.1.x to 4.1.y that

* Silent column specification changes happen, or don&#039;t, which makes the schema check fail
* FLOAT rounds differently.

Of course these are just the differences we happened to hit. 

You can pretty much forget replicating from 4.x to 5.x and have the data be the same on master &amp; slave - if it even works at all. LOAD DATA crashed the slave in our tests.

And of course, you can forget data being the same if you use MyISAM, or if your master crashes ever. However, a system such as that described above will detect problems and allow them to be fixed operationally.

Hopefully in production your master doesn&#039;t crash too often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I should warn people who think it&#8217;s cool to do SHOW CREATE TABLE on the master &amp; slave, and compare the results, that it doesn&#8217;t always return foreign key constraints in the same order.</p>
<p>It appears that the order FK constraints are returned is nondeterminstic, so your comparison will have to take this into account; I wrote a perl script to (hackily) parse out the constraints, sort them, and append at the end. This means I can still see if they are wrong on the slave, but won&#8217;t notice if they are in a different order.</p>
<p>Finally, if you thought you could run a different version on a slave, forget it. When you run a different MySQL version (even minor), all bets are off, especially in statement-based mode.</p>
<p>We found that migrating from 4.1.x to 4.1.y that</p>
<p>* Silent column specification changes happen, or don&#8217;t, which makes the schema check fail<br />
* FLOAT rounds differently.</p>
<p>Of course these are just the differences we happened to hit. </p>
<p>You can pretty much forget replicating from 4.x to 5.x and have the data be the same on master &amp; slave &#8211; if it even works at all. LOAD DATA crashed the slave in our tests.</p>
<p>And of course, you can forget data being the same if you use MyISAM, or if your master crashes ever. However, a system such as that described above will detect problems and allow them to be fixed operationally.</p>
<p>Hopefully in production your master doesn&#8217;t crash too often.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

