On Wednesday 27 August 2003 10:50, Hans van Harten wrote: > Matthias Blaser wrote: > > It's possible a server could act as master for one database with slave > > server A and as a slave for another database which runs on master > > server B? > > As in A - database1 -> S - database2- > B
Well, it should be something like this (sorry, if it was confusing): Our server X: master for database1, the slave for this db is on server A Our server X: slave for database2, the master for this db is on server B Is it possible to run both configurations on the same server (X)? (he should be master for database1, but slave for database2, both databases are on different servers). Background is, that one customer want to have his database on our server running in slave mode, replicating his own intranet-database... now we have to decide if we can run this configuration on our main server or have to install a dedicated one. If these two configurations written above are not possible on the same server, we want to run a dedicated server, cause it's not that nice and flexible to be restricted to only one replication-customer. > AFAIK anything S logs will be red by B. Using 'replicate-do-db=database2' > B will only process changes for database2. As far as I understood, it's not possible for B to replicate any other database if his replication user has only access to database2 regardless if 'replicate-do-db=database2' is set or not and regardless if the master server writes other databases to it's binarylog too? Many thanks, Matt mysql, sql -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
