If you use a combination of database-level and table-level replication filtering options, the replica first accepts or ignores events using the database options, then it evaluates all events permitted by those options according to the table options. This can sometimes lead to results that seem counterintuitive. It is also important to note that the results vary depending on whether the operation is logged using statement-based or row-based binary logging format. If you want to be sure that your replication filters always operate in the same way independently of the binary logging format, which is particularly important if you are using mixed binary logging format, follow the guidance in this topic.
The effect of the replication filtering options differs between
binary logging formats because of the way the database name is
identified. With statement-based format, DML statements are
handled based on the current database, as specified by the
USE
statement. With row-based
format, DML statements are handled based on the database where
the modified table exists. DDL statements are always filtered
based on the current database, as specified by the
USE
statement, regardless of the
binary logging format.
An operation that involves multiple tables can also be affected
differently by replication filtering options depending on the
binary logging format. Operations to watch out for include
transactions involving multi-table
UPDATE
statements, triggers,
cascading foreign keys, stored functions that update multiple
tables, and DML statements that invoke stored functions that
update one or more tables. If these operations update both
filtered-in and filtered-out tables, the results can vary with
the binary logging format.
If you need to guarantee that your replication filters operate
consistently regardless of the binary logging format,
particularly if you are using mixed binary logging format
(binlog_format=MIXED
), use only
table-level replication filtering options, and do not use
database-level replication filtering options. Also, do not use
multi-table DML statements that update both filtered-in and
filtered-out tables.
If you need to use a combination of database-level and table-level replication filters, and want these to operate as consistently as possible, choose one of the following strategies:
If you use row-based binary logging format (
binlog_format=ROW
), for DDL statements, rely on theUSE
statement to set the database and do not specify the database name. You can consider changing to row-based binary logging format for improved consistency with replication filtering. See Section 5.4.4.2, “Setting The Binary Log Format” for the conditions that apply to changing the binary logging format.If you use statement-based or mixed binary logging format (
binlog_format=STATEMENT
orMIXED
), for both DML and DDL statements, rely on theUSE
statement and do not use the database name. Also, do not use multi-table DML statements that update both filtered-in and filtered-out tables.
Example 16.7 A --replicate-ignore-db
option and a
--replicate-do-table
option
On the source, the following statements are issued:
USE db1;
CREATE TABLE t2 LIKE t1;
INSERT INTO db2.t3 VALUES (1);
The replica has the following replication filtering options set:
replicate-ignore-db = db1
replicate-do-table = db2.t3
The DDL statement CREATE TABLE
creates the table in db1
, as specified by
the preceding USE
statement.
The replica filters out this statement according to its
--replicate-ignore-db = db1
option, because db1
is the current
database. This result is the same whatever the binary logging
format is on the source. However, the result of the DML
INSERT
statement is different
depending on the binary logging format:
If row-based binary logging format is in use on the source (
binlog_format=ROW
), the replica evaluates theINSERT
operation using the database where the table exists, which is named asdb2
. The database-level option--replicate-ignore-db = db1
, which is evaluated first, therefore does not apply. The table-level option--replicate-do-table = db2.t3
does apply, so the replica applies the change to tablet3
.If statement-based binary logging format is in use on the source (
binlog_format=STATEMENT
), the replica evaluates theINSERT
operation using the default database, which was set by theUSE
statement todb1
and has not been changed. According to its database-level--replicate-ignore-db = db1
option, it therefore ignores the operation and does not apply the change to tablet3
. The table-level option--replicate-do-table = db2.t3
is not checked, because the statement already matched a database-level option and was ignored.
If the --replicate-ignore-db =
db1
option on the replica is necessary, and the use
of statement-based (or mixed) binary logging format on the
source is also necessary, the results can be made consistent
by omitting the database name from the
INSERT
statement and relying on
a USE
statement instead, as
follows:
USE db1;
CREATE TABLE t2 LIKE t1;
USE db2;
INSERT INTO t3 VALUES (1);
In this case, the replica always evaluates the
INSERT
statement based on the
database db2
. Whether the operation is
logged in statement-based or row-based binary format, the
results remain the same.