Alfranio Correia 678eb3d66f BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement ... Let - T be a transactional table and N non-transactional table. - B be begin, C commit and R rollback. - M be a mixed statement, i.e. a statement that updates both T and N. - M* be a mixed statement that fails while updating either T or N. This patch restore the behavior presented in 5.1.37 for rows either produced in the RBR or MIXED modes, when a M* statement that happened early in a transaction had their changes written to the binary log outside the boundaries of the transaction and wrapped in a BEGIN/ROLLBACK. This was done to keep the slave consistent with with the master as the rollback would keep the changes on N and undo them on T. In particular, we do what follows: . B M* T C would log - B M* R B T C. Note that, we are not preserving history from the master as we are introducing a rollback that never happened. However, this seems to be more acceptable than making the slave diverge. We do not fix the following case: . B T M* C would log B T M* C. The slave will diverge as the changes on T tables that originated from the M statement are rolled back on the master but not on the slave. Unfortunately, we cannot simply rollback the transaction as this would undo any uncommitted changes on T tables. SBR is not considered in this patch because a failing statement is written to the binary along with the error code and a slave executes and then rolls back the statement when it has an associated error code, thus undoing the effects on T. In RBR and MBR, a full-fledged fix will be pushed after the WL 2687.		2009-10-06 01:38:58 +01:00
..
binlog_tests	BUG#47287 RBR: replication diff on basic case with txn- and non-txn tables in a statement	2009-10-06 01:38:58 +01:00
rpl_tests	Bug #46931 rpl.rpl_get_master_version_and_clock fails on hpux11.31	2009-09-27 17:00:29 +08:00