In MariaDB 10.2.12, these two don’t yet work together. GTID = Global Transaction ID.  In the master-slave asynchronous replication realm, this means that you can reconnect a slave to another server (change its master) and it’ll happily continue replicating from the correct point.  No more fussing with filenames and offsets (which of course will both differ on different machines).

So in concept the GTIID is “globally” unique – that means it’s consistent across an entire infra: a binlogged write transaction will have the same GTID no matter on which machine you look at it.

• OK: if you are transitioning from async replication to Galera cluster, and have a cluster as slave of the old infra, then GTID will work fine.
• PROBLEM: if you want to run an async slave in a Galera cluster, GTID will currently not work. At least not reliably.

The overview issue is …

GTID replication has made it convenient to setup and maintain MySQL replication. You need not worry about binary log file and position thanks to GTID and auto-positioning. However, things can go wrong when pointing a slave to a different master. Consider a situation where the new master has executed transactions that haven’t been executed on the old master. If the corresponding binary logs have been purged already, how do you point the slave to the new master?

The scenario

Based on technical requirements and architectural change, there is a need to point the slave to a different master by

1. Pointing it to another node in a PXC cluster
2. Pointing it to another master in master/master replication
3. Pointing it to another slave of a master
4. Pointing it to the slave of a slave of the master … and so on and so forth.

Theoretically, pointing to a new master with GTID …

In this blog post, we’ll look at how to navigate some of the complexities of multi-source GTID replication.

GTID replication is often a real challenge for DBAs, especially if this has to do with multi-source GTID replication. A while back, I came across a really interesting customer environment with shards where multi-master, multi-source, multi-threaded MySQL 5.6 MIXED replication was active. This is a highly complex environment that has both pros and cons, introducing risks as a trade-off for specific customer requirements.

This is the set up of part of this environment:

I started looking into this setup when a statement broke replication between db1 and db10. Replication broke due to a statement executed on a schema that was not present on db10. This also …

MySQL crash-safe replication is an old feature (~4 years as of MySQL 5.6), but it’s not consistently understood or applied. The MySQL manual on the topic, 16.3.2 Handling an Unexpected Halt of a Replication Slave, is correct and authoritative, but unless you grok MySQL replication that page doesn’t make it obvious why crash-safe replication works. Other blog posts explain why, but sometimes add other considerations, making it unclear which settings are necessary and sufficient.

MySQL crash-safe replication is an old feature (~4 years as of MySQL 5.6), but it’s not consistently understood or applied. The MySQL manual on the topic, 16.3.2 Handling an Unexpected Halt of a Replication Slave, is correct and authoritative, but unless you grok MySQL replication that page doesn’t make it obvious why crash-safe replication works. Other blog posts explain why, but sometimes add other considerations, making it unclear which settings are necessary and sufficient. The aim of this blog post is total enlightenment, a full crash-safe-spiritual awakening. Light the censers and let us begin at the beginning…

MySQL crash-safe replication is an old feature (~4 years as of MySQL 5.6), but it’s not consistently understood or applied. The MySQL manual on the topic, 16.3.2 Handling an Unexpected Halt of a Replication Slave, is correct and authoritative, but unless you grok MySQL replication that page doesn’t make it obvious why crash-safe replication works. Other blog posts explain why, but sometimes add other considerations, making it unclear which settings are necessary and sufficient.

High availability for MySQL has become increasingly relevant given the ever increasing rate of adoption and implementation. It’s no secret to anyone in the community that the popularity of MySQL has become noteworthy. I still remember my start with MySQL in the early 5.0 days and people told me that I may not want to consider wasting my time training on a database that didn’t have a large industry adoption, but look at where we are now! One of my favorite pages to cite when trying to exhibit this fact is the db-engines.com ranking trend page where we can see that MySQL is right up there and contending with enterprise products such as Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle.

MySQL has gone from being part of the ever famous LAMP stack for users looking to set up their first website to seeing adoption from major technical players such as …

In this blog, I’ll look at how to do MySQL point in time recovery (PITR) correctly.

Sometimes we need to restore from a backup, and then replay the transactions that happened after the backup was taken. This is a common procedure in most disaster recovery plans, when for example you accidentally drop a table/database or run an update/delete without the “where” clause and lose data.

The usual way is to get a copy of your binlogs and use mysqlbinlog to replay those transactions. But this approach has many pitfalls that can make the whole PITR process a nightmare. Some examples:

• You need to make sure to run a single mysqlbinlog command with all related binlogs, and pipe them to mysql at once. Otherwise, if binlog.000001 creates a temporary table, and …

In this blog, we’ll look at group replication and how it deals with flow control (FC) and replication lag. 

Overview

In the last few months, we had two main actors in the MySQL ecosystem: ProxySQL and Group-Replication (with the evolution to InnoDB Cluster). 

While I have extensively covered the first, my last serious work on Group Replication dates back to some lab version years past.

Given that Oracle decided to declare it GA, and Percona’s decision to provide some level of Group Replication support, I decided it was time for me to take a look at it again.

We’ve seen a lot of coverage already too many Group Replication topics. There are articles about Group Replication and performance, Group Replication and basic functionalities (or lack of it like automatic node provisioning), Group Replication and ProxySQL, and so on.

But one question kept coming up over and over in my …

In this blog, we’ll look at different MySQL high availability options.

The dynamic MySQL ecosystem is rapidly evolving many technologies built around MySQL. This is especially true for the technologies involved with the high availability (HA) aspects of MySQL. When I joined Percona back in 2009, some of these HA technologies were very popular – but have since been almost forgotten. During the same interval, new technologies have emerged. In order to give some perspective to the reader, and hopefully help to make better choices, I’ll review the MySQL HA landscape as it is in 2017. This review will be in three parts. The first part (this post) will cover the technologies that have been around for a long time: the elders. The second part will focus on the technologies that are very popular today: the adults. Finally, the last part will try to extrapolate which technologies could become popular in the upcoming years: the …