New MariaDB/MySQL storage engines such as MyRocks and TokuDB have renewed interest in using engines other than InnoDB. This is great, but also presents new challenges. In this article, I will describe work that I am currently finishing, and which addresses one such challenge.

For example, the left bar in the figure shows what happens to MyRocks replication performance when used with a default install where the replication state table uses InnoDB. The middle bar shows the performance improvement from my patch.

Current MariaDB and MySQL replication uses tables to transactionally record the replication state (eg mysql.gtid_slave_pos). When non-InnoDB storage engines are introduced the question becomes: What engine should be used for the replication table? Any choice will penalise other engines heavily by injecting a cross-engine transaction with every replicated change. Unless all tables can be migrated to the …

My blog has moved! Read it in the new location here.

New MariaDB/MySQL storage engines such as MyRocks and TokuDB have renewed interest in using engines other than InnoDB. This is great, but also presents new challenges. In this article, I will describe work that I am currently finishing, and which addresses one such challenge.

For example, the left bar in the figure shows what happens to MyRocks replication performance when used with a default install where the replication state table uses InnoDB. The middle bar shows the performance improvement from my patch.

Current MariaDB and MySQL replication uses tables to transactionally record the replication state (eg mysql.gtid_slave_pos). When non-InnoDB storage engines are introduced the question becomes: What engine should be used for the replication …

My previous writings were mostly teoretical, so I wanted to give a more practical example, showing the actual state of the current code. I also wanted to show how I have tried to make the feature fit well into the existing replication features, without requiring the user to enable lots of options or understand lots of restrictions before being able to use it.

So let us start! We will build the code from lp:~maria-captains/maria/10.0-mdev26, which at the time of writing is at revision knielsen@knielsen-hq.org-20130214134205-403yjqvzva6xk52j.

First, we start a master server on port 3310 and put a bit of data into it:

    server1> use test; …

My blog has moved! Read it in the new location here.

My previous writings were mostly teoretical, so I wanted to give a more practical example, showing the actual state of the current code. I also wanted to show how I have tried to make the feature fit well into the existing replication features, without requiring the user to enable lots of options or understand lots of restrictions before being able to use it.

So let us start! We will build the code from lp:~maria-captains/maria/10.0-mdev26, which at the time of writing is at revision …

I got some very good comments/questions on my previous post on MariaDB global transaction ID, from Giuseppe and Robert (of Tungsten fame). I thought a follow-up post would be appropriate to answer and further elaborate on the comments, as the points they raise are very important and interesting.

(It also gives me the opportunity to explain more deeply a lot of interesting design decisions that I left out in the first post for the sake of brevity and clarity.)

On crash-safe slave

One of the things I really wanted to improve with global transaction ID is to make the replication slaves more crash safe with respect to their current replication state. This state is mostly persistently stored information about which event(s) were last executed on the slave, so that after a server restart the slave will know from which point in the master binlog(s) …

My blog has moved! Read it in the new location here.

I got some very good comments/questions on my previous post on MariaDB global transaction ID, from Giuseppe and Robert (of Tungsten fame). I thought a follow-up post would be appropriate to answer and further elaborate on the comments, as the points they raise are very important and interesting.

(It also gives me the opportunity to explain more deeply a lot of interesting design decisions that I left out in the first post for the sake of brevity and clarity.)

On crash-safe slave

One of the things I really wanted to improve with global transaction ID is to make the replication slaves more crash safe with respect to their current replication state. This state is mostly persistently …

The main goal of global transaction ID is to make it easy to promote a new master and switch all slaves over to continue replication from the new master. This is currently harder than it could be, since the current replication position for a slave is specified in coordinates that are specific to the current master, and it is not trivial to translate them into the corresponding coordinates on the new master. Global transaction ID solves this by annotating each event with the global transaction id which is unique and universal across the whole replication hierarchy.

In addition, there are at least two other main goals for MariaDB global transaction ID:

1. Make it easy to setup global transaction ID, and easy to provision a new slave into an existing replication hierarchy.
2. Fully support …

My blog has moved! Read it in the new location here.

The main goal of global transaction ID is to make it easy to promote a new master and switch all slaves over to continue replication from the new master. This is currently harder than it could be, since the current replication position for a slave is specified in coordinates that are specific to the current master, and it is not trivial to translate them into the corresponding coordinates on the new master. Global transaction ID solves this by annotating each event with the global transaction id which is unique and universal across the whole replication hierarchy.

In addition, there are at least two other main goals for MariaDB global transaction ID:

1. Make it easy to setup global transaction ID, …

What do you think of this piece of C code?

  void foo(long v) {
    unsigned long u;
    unsigned sign;
    if (v < 0) {
      u = -v;
      sign = 1;
    } else {
      u = v;
      sign = 0;
    }
    ...

Seems pretty simple, right? Then what do you think of this output from MySQL:

  mysql> create table t1 (a bigint) as select '-9223372036854775807.5' as a;
  mysql> select * from t1;
  +----------------------+
  | a                    |
  +----------------------+
  | -'..--).0-*(+,))+(0( | 
  +----------------------+

Yes, that is authentic output from older versions of MySQL. Not just the wrong number, the output is complete garbage! This is my all-time favorite MySQL bug#31799. It was caused by code like the above C snippet.

So can you spot what is wrong with the code? Looks pretty simple, does it not? But the title of this post …

My blog has moved! Read it in the new location here.

What do you think of this piece of C code?

  void foo(long v) {
    unsigned long u;
    unsigned sign;
    if (v < 0) {
      u = -v;
      sign = 1;
    } else {
      u = v;
      sign = 0;
    }
    ...

Seems pretty simple, right? Then what do you think of this output from MySQL:

  mysql> create table t1 (a bigint) as select '-9223372036854775807.5' as a;
  mysql> select * from t1;
  +----------------------+
  | a                    |
  +----------------------+
  | -'..--).0-*(+,))+(0( | 
  +----------------------+

Yes, that is authentic output from older versions of MySQL. Not just the wrong number, the output is complete garbage! This is my all-time favorite MySQL bug#31799. It was caused by code like …