Thanks for the review. I have added some changes according to your notes.
> @@ -3212,7 +3212,7 @@ int handler::create_lookup_handler()
> handler *tmp;
> if (lookup_handler != this)
> return 0;
> - if (!(tmp= clone(table->s->normalized_path.str, table->in_use->mem_root)))
> + if (!(tmp= clone(table->s->normalized_path.str, &table->mem_root)))
that's wrong, the lifetime of a lookup handler is one statement, it's
destroyed at the end. You cannot keep allocating new handlers on the
table->mem_root for every statement.
Ouch! I have confused these two. Yes, I needed the statement lifetime. But the problem is
I was setting a new mem_root for each event, just in case. That was a mistake. First, I had no case when something was allocated there. Second, per-event data should be anyway allocated
differently, not on thd->mem_root.
So I removed event_mem_root completely. There was nothing similar in replication code.
> --- a/sql/log_event_server.cc
> +++ b/sql/log_event_server.cc
> @@ -6007,6 +6007,11 @@ int Rows_log_event::do_apply_event(rpl_group_info *rgi)
> if (m_width == table->s->fields && bitmap_is_set_all(&m_cols))
> set_flags(COMPLETE_ROWS_F);
>
> + Rpl_table_data rpl_data{};
> + if (rgi) rgi->get_table_data(table, &rpl_data);
> +
> + if (!rpl_data.copy_fields)
> + {
> /*
> Set tables write and read sets.
>
> @@ -6027,17 +6027,19 @@ int Rows_log_event::do_apply_event(rpl_group_info *rgi)
> bitmap_set_all(table->read_set);
> if (get_general_type_code() == DELETE_ROWS_EVENT ||
> get_general_type_code() == UPDATE_ROWS_EVENT)
> bitmap_intersect(table->read_set,&m_cols);
>
> bitmap_set_all(table->write_set);
>
> /* WRITE ROWS EVENTS store the bitmap in m_cols instead of m_cols_ai */
> MY_BITMAP *after_image= ((get_general_type_code() == UPDATE_ROWS_EVENT) ?
> &m_cols_ai : &m_cols);
> bitmap_intersect(table->write_set, after_image);
>
> this->slave_exec_mode= slave_exec_mode_options; // fix the mode
> + }
I'm sorry, I don't quite understand. "some fields are excluded based on
m_cols value" - what columns were excluded? What was the value of m_cols
here?
Yes, it was a replicated columns bitmap, not value here:)