Bug #20724 FEDERATED does not honour SET INSERT_ID
| Submitted: | 27 Jun 2006 14:00 | Modified: | 2 Jan 2007 15:52 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reporter: | Guilhem Bichot | Email Updates: | |
| Status: | Verified | Impact on me: | |
| Category: | MySQL Server: Federated storage engine | Severity: | S3 (Non-critical) |
| Version: | 5.1-bk | OS: | Linux (linux) |
| Assigned to: | CPU Architecture: | Any |
[7 Aug 2007 4:59]
Uri H
It also happens to me using MySQL Community v5.0.41 and v5.0.45 under Windows XP/2003. The main issue I have with it is that it makes replication inconsistent.
Portions of this website are copyright © 2001, 2002 The PHP Group
Page generated in 0.038 sec. using MySQL 8.4.7-u6-cloud
Timestamp references displayed by the system are UTC.
Content reproduced on this site is the property of the
respective copyright holders.
It is not reviewed in advance
by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion of
Oracle or any other party.
Description: didn't test with 5.0. I edited federated.test like this: ===== t/federated.test 1.25 vs edited ===== *** /home/mysql_src/mysql-5.1-new-WL3146-handler/BitKeeper/tmp/bk_federated.test-1.25_Jdi8vY 2006-06-04 17:52:05 +02:00 --- edited/t/federated.test 2006-06-27 15:58:29 +02:00 *************** *** 153,158 **** --- 153,159 ---- ENGINE="FEDERATED" DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 CONNECTION='mysql://root@127.0.0.1:$SLAVE_MYPORT/federated/t1'; + set insert_id=1234; INSERT INTO federated.t1 (name, other) VALUES ('First Name', 11111); INSERT INTO federated.t1 (name, other) VALUES ('Second Name', 22222); INSERT INTO federated.t1 (name, other) VALUES ('Third Name', 33333); And the test showed no difference in result except the "set insert_id=1234" line, which means that the "SELECT * FROM federated.t1" which is a few lines below in the test, shows the same data as without the SET INSERT_ID, thus SET INSERT_ID is not respected. Note that this breaks recovery from statement-based binlogs, and statement-based replication. How to repeat: see description