1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
|
# BUG#47312: RBR: Disabling key on slave breaks replication:
# HA_ERR_WRONG_INDEX
#
# Description
# ===========
#
# This test case checks whether disabling a key on a slave breaks
# replication or not.
#
# Case #1, shows that while not using ALTER TABLE... DISABLE KEYS and
# the slave has no key defined while the master has one, replication
# won't break.
#
#
-- source include/not_group_replication_plugin.inc
-- source include/have_binlog_format_row.inc
-- source include/master-slave.inc
#
# Case #1: master has key, but slave has not.
# Replication does not break.
#
SET SQL_LOG_BIN=0;
CREATE TABLE t (a int, b int, c int, key(b));
SET SQL_LOG_BIN=1;
-- connection slave
CREATE TABLE t (a int, b int, c int);
-- connection master
INSERT INTO t VALUES (1,2,4);
INSERT INTO t VALUES (4,3,4);
DELETE FROM t;
--source include/sync_slave_sql_with_master.inc
-- connection master
DROP TABLE t;
--source include/sync_slave_sql_with_master.inc
#
# BUG#53893: RBR: nullable unique key can lead to out-of-sync slave
#
#
# We insert two rows. Both with part of UNIQUE KEY set to null.
# Then we update the last row inserted. On master the correct
# row is updated. On the slave the wrong row would be updated
# because the engine would look it up by the NULL Unique KEY.
# As a consquence, the wrong row would be updated.
#
-- source include/rpl_reset.inc
-- connection master
CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 INT NOT NULL, c2 INT NOT NULL, c3 INT, UNIQUE KEY(c1,c3), KEY(c2));
INSERT INTO t1(c1,c2) VALUES(1,1);
INSERT INTO t1(c1,c2) VALUES(1,2);
UPDATE t1 SET c1=1000 WHERE c2=2;
--source include/sync_slave_sql_with_master.inc
-- let $diff_tables= master:t1, slave:t1
-- source include/diff_tables.inc
-- connection master
DROP TABLE t1;
--echo #
--echo # Bug#27244826: INVISIBLE INDEXES ARE NOT RESPECTED BY SLAVE UNDER ROW
--echo # FORMAT
--echo #
CREATE TABLE t1 ( id INT, KEY idx_id(id) );
INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (1), (2), (3);
--source include/sync_slave_sql_with_master.inc
--echo # Alter idx_id index on slave to invisible.
ALTER TABLE t1 ALTER INDEX idx_id INVISIBLE;
--connection master
DELETE FROM t1;
--source include/sync_slave_sql_with_master.inc
--echo # check whether invisible attribute is respected
SELECT table_name, index_name, is_visible
FROM information_schema.statistics
WHERE index_name = 'idx_id';
# This prints warning 3719:
#
# 'utf8' is currently an alias for the character set UTF8MB3, which will be
# replaced by UTF8MB4 in a future release. Please consider using UTF8MB4 in
# order to be unambiguous.
#
# The number of warnings printed depends on the platform,
# so use disable_warnings to get a stable result file.
--disable_warnings
SELECT * FROM sys.schema_unused_indexes WHERE index_name = 'idx_id';
--enable_warnings
SELECT rows_selected
FROM sys.schema_index_statistics
WHERE index_name = 'idx_id';
--connection master
DROP TABLE t1;
--source include/rpl_end.inc
|
