Is BLACKHOLE support feasible?
Bug #1296718 reported by
Jay Janssen
This bug affects 2 people
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Percona XtraDB Cluster moved to https://jira.percona.com/projects/PXC |
Confirmed
|
Wishlist
|
Seppo Jaakola |
Bug Description
Since BLACKHOLE's internal state doesn't change at all, does it matter if it does not support Galera and prioritized transaction? Is it feasible to support BLACKHOLE RBR intermixed with Innodb transactions in PXC?
Changed in percona-xtradb-cluster: | |
assignee: | nobody → Seppo Jaakola (seppo-jaakola) |
status: | New → In Progress |
Changed in percona-xtradb-cluster: | |
status: | In Progress → Confirmed |
importance: | Undecided → Wishlist |
To post a comment you must log in.
Uh, forgive my ignorance, what would be BLACKHOLE RBR? Some generic row representation?
Anyway, given that the only purpose of blackhole is to write event into binlog, it should not matter whether it is ROW or STATEMENT.