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 the- USEstatement 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 7.4.4.2, “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=STATEMENTor- MIXED), for both DML and DDL statements, rely on the- USEstatement 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 19.7 A --replicate-ignore-db option and a
--replicate-do-table option
On the replication source server, 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 replication source server. 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 the- INSERToperation using the database where the table exists, which is named as- db2. The database-level option- --replicate-ignore-db = db1, which is evaluated first, therefore does not apply. The table-level option- --replicate-do-table = db2.t3does apply, so the replica applies the change to table- t3.
- If statement-based binary logging format is in use on the source ( - binlog_format=STATEMENT), the replica evaluates the- INSERToperation using the default database, which was set by the- USEstatement to- db1and has not been changed. According to its database-level- --replicate-ignore-db = db1option, it therefore ignores the operation and does not apply the change to table- t3. The table-level option- --replicate-do-table = db2.t3is 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.