Kristian Nielsen kniel...@knielsen-hq.org writes:
So we should introduce
rgi-abort_slave, and set it during STOP SLAVE for all queued rgi entries.
Actually, we do not need to introduce another flag. We can just check
rgi-rli-abort_slave.
- Kristian.
Hi Monty,
So as promised, I took a look at the existing code for STOP SLAVE, and came up
with some ideas for how to extend this to handle parallel replication.
In existing code, STOP SLAVE ends up in terminate_slave_threads(). The
interesting part here is the SQL thread; stopping the IO thread
Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
Kristian We _do_ need a full memory barrier here (memory barrier is implied
in taking a
Kristian mutex). Otherwise the compiler or CPU could re-order the setting of
the
Kristian wakeup_subsequent_commits_running flag with the reads and writes
Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
What should happen if you kill a replication thread is that
replication should stop for that master.
Kristian This needs more thought, I think ... certainly something looks not
right.
After looking at the full code, I think that the logical way
Hi!
Kristian == Kristian Nielsen kniel...@knielsen-hq.org writes:
cut
So there is a barrier between we set it and potentially clear it.
As the 'clear' may now happen 'any time' (from other threads point of
view) I don't see why it needs to be protected.
Kristian Right.
Kristian I looked
Hi!
Kristian == Kristian Nielsen kniel...@knielsen-hq.org writes:
Kristian Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
What should happen if you kill a replication thread is that
replication should stop for that master.
cut
Kristian It seems to make sense that KILL CONNECTION on the SQL
Hi!
Kristian == Kristian Nielsen kniel...@knielsen-hq.org writes:
Kristian Monty,
Kristian Thanks for the comments so far.
Kristian I have pushed fixes to 10.0-knielsen, and some specific replies are
below.
Thanks. I will review that today.
Kristian - Kristian.
Kristian Michael Widenius
Hi!
Kristian == Kristian Nielsen kniel...@knielsen-hq.org writes:
Kristian Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
+ if (list-wakeup_subsequent_commits_running)
+ {
+mysql_mutex_lock(list-LOCK_wait_commit);
+list-wakeup_subsequent_commits_running= false;
+
Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
+ if (list-wakeup_subsequent_commits_running)
+ {
+mysql_mutex_lock(list-LOCK_wait_commit);
+list-wakeup_subsequent_commits_running= false;
+mysql_mutex_unlock(list-LOCK_wait_commit);
Why do we need the mutex
Hi!
Here is the first part of the review.
I have 1/2 of one file left (rpl_parallel.cc) to review but I wanted
you to have a chance to read what I have done so far.
I plan to finish the review tomorrow and start working on the code
during the weekend.
Kristian == Kristian Nielsen
Monty,
Thanks for the comments so far.
I have pushed fixes to 10.0-knielsen, and some specific replies are below.
- Kristian.
Michael Widenius mo...@askmonty.org writes:
+ --slave-parallel-threads=#
+ If non-zero, number of threads to spawn to apply in
+ parallel events on the slave that
11 matches
Mail list logo
