[MDEV-25674] No SQL variable for master_retry_count setting Created: 2021-05-14  Updated: 2021-07-21  Resolved: 2021-07-21

Status: Closed
Project: MariaDB Server
Component/s: Replication
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: N/A

Type: Bug Priority: Minor
Reporter: Hartmut Holzgraefe Assignee: Hartmut Holzgraefe
Resolution: Incomplete Votes: 0
Labels: need_feedback

Issue Links:
Relates
relates to MDEV-16437 merge 5.7 P_S replication instrumenta... Closed

 Description   

The master-retry-count setting can't be changed, or at least verified, at runtime as there is no SQL variable for this setting.

Also the setting is only documented as a command line option, even though it is also accepted as a valid option in configuration files

https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mysqld-options/#-master-retry-count



 Comments   
Comment by Alice Sherepa [ 2021-05-14 ]

On 10.6 there is performance_schema.replication_connection_configuration table, that shows CONNECTION_RETRY_COUNT:

MariaDB [performance_schema]> select * from performance_schema.replication_connection_configuration\G
*************************** 1. row ***************************
                 CHANNEL_NAME: 
                         HOST: localhost
                         PORT: 3313
                         USER: root
                   USING_GTID: NO
                  SSL_ALLOWED: NO
                  SSL_CA_FILE: 
                  SSL_CA_PATH: 
              SSL_CERTIFICATE: 
                   SSL_CIPHER: 
                      SSL_KEY: 
SSL_VERIFY_SERVER_CERTIFICATE: NO
                 SSL_CRL_FILE: 
                 SSL_CRL_PATH: 
    CONNECTION_RETRY_INTERVAL: 60
       CONNECTION_RETRY_COUNT: 100000
           HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL: 30.000
            IGNORE_SERVER_IDS: 
           REPL_DO_DOMAIN_IDS: 
       REPL_IGNORE_DOMAIN_IDS: 
1 row in set (0.003 sec)

and the default was changed to 100000 (86400 before)
but it is not documented yet.

Comment by Andrei Elkin [ 2021-05-21 ]

hholzgra, does performance_schema.replication_connection_configuration present an acceptable solution from your point of view?

Generated at Thu Feb 08 09:39:29 UTC 2024 using Jira 8.20.16#820016-sha1:9d11dbea5f4be3d4cc21f03a88dd11d8c8687422.