On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Arjen Lentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Jeremy, Mats > > On 22/08/2008, at 1:59 AM, Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > >> Does it make sense to explicitly record the database(s) and/or table(s) >> involved in a statement. I don't know how common it is to >> filter replication based on one or both of those, but I tend to encounter >> it WAY more than I'd expect to... >> > > > It'd be great if a slave could give a master a ruleset for this, so it > doesn't have to drag across everything before filtering. > So, I like the idea of explicitly recording the dbs/tables involved in a > query (and not just the current default db), but more for the benefit of the > master being able to filter before sending it to an individual slave, rather > than having all the extra info go across the wire too. That'd be useful. Or per-db binlogs, which is a different can of worms... Jeremy
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
