Sachin Setiya <sachin.set...@mariadb.com> writes: >>> I think that sounds like a very bad idea. The current_pos/slave_pos is the >>> single biggest source of confusion regarding GTID. (In fact, I think it >>> would be best to deprecate/eventually remove current_pos). Better not add >>> to >>> the confusion... >>> >>> If we remove current pos then how will how will master turned slave will >> work ? >> > May be in this case user have to manually update gtid_slave_pos ?
Yes, that is one option, eg. SET GLOBAL gtid_slave_pos = @@gtid_binlog_pos; Another option is to make an option to CHANGE MASTER that updates the gtid_slave_pos _at_the_time_of_that_command_only_, like a one-shot master_use_gtid=current_pos. Eg. something like: CHANGE MASTER TO master_host=xxx ... gtid_slave_pos_from_master=1; The idea is that to make old master a slave, a CHANGE MASTER command will usually be needed anyway. And _that_ is the point at which user wants the binlog position to migrate to the slave position. But with the current master_use_gtid=current_pos, this migration happens at every future slave reconnect, which is very much not expected, and users are all the time confused that a random manual transation on their slave later makes GTID replication break. - Kristian. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
