David Rees wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Geoffrey <lists at serioustechnology.com> wrote:
>> Will it cause a problem if one adds fields to a table that is being
>> replicated?
>>
>> That is, will it break the replication process, or will the replication
>> continue to simply replicate the previous set of fields?
> 
> It should continue to replicate the previous set of fields, but is not
> recommended to do so.

I don't know if it's related or not, but it appears that our slave is 
now out of sync with the master.  It's a two node set up, and it's been 
replicating for some time now.  It's just now that I've gone in and 
compared record counts on some major tables and they are not in sync. 
Further, I can see updates happen to the master node tables but don't 
see them on the slave.

If adding the field didn't cause the problem, any ideas what might have?

-- 
Until later, Geoffrey

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
  - Benjamin Franklin