Proven technology that has existed in MySQL since 3.23.

Less data written to log files. When updates or deletes affect many rows, this results in much less storage space required for log files. This also means that taking and restoring from backups can be accomplished more quickly.

Log files contain all statements that made any changes, so they can be used to audit the database.

Statements which are unsafe for SBR.  Not all statements which modify data (such as INSERT DELETE, UPDATE, and REPLACE statements) can be replicated using statement-based replication. Any nondeterministic behavior is difficult to replicate when using statement-based replication. Examples of such DML (Data Modification Language) statements include the following:

When using statement-based replication, statements that cannot be replicated correctly using statement-based mode are logged with a warning like the one shown here:

090213 16:58:54 [Warning] Statement is not safe to log in statement format.

A similar warning is also issued to the client in such cases.

INSERT ... SELECT requires a greater number of row-level locks than with row-based replication.

UPDATE statements that require a table scan (because no index is used in the WHERE clause) must lock a greater number of rows than with row-based replication.

For InnoDB: An INSERT statement that uses AUTO_INCREMENT blocks other nonconflicting INSERT statements.

For complex statements, the statement must be evaluated and executed on the slave before the rows are updated or inserted. With row-based replication, the slave only has to run the statement to apply the differences, not the full statement.

Stored functions execute with the same NOW() value as the calling statement. However, this is not true of stored procedures.

Deterministic UDFs must be applied on the slaves.

If there is an error in evaluation on the slave, particularly when executing complex statements, then using statement-based replication may slowly increase the margin of error across the affected rows over time. See Section 16.3.1.21, “Slave Errors during Replication”.

Tables must be (nearly) identical on master and slave. See Section 16.3.1.5, “Replication with Differing Tables on Master and Slave”, for more information.

All changes can be replicated. This is the safest form of replication.

For MySQL versions earlier than 5.1.14, DDL (Data Definition Language) statements such as CREATE TABLE are replicated using statement-based replication, while DML statements, as well as GRANT and REVOKE statements, are replicated using row-based-replication.

In MySQL 5.1.14 and later, the mysql database is not replicated. The mysql database is instead seen as a node-specific database. Row-based replication is not supported on tables in this database. Instead, statements that would normally update this information — such as GRANT, REVOKE and the manipulation of triggers, stored routines (including stored procedures), and views — are all replicated to slaves using statement-based replication.

For statements like CREATE ... SELECT, a CREATE statement is generated from the table definition and replicated using the statement-based format, while the row insertions are replicated using the row-based format.

The technology is the same as in most other database management systems; knowledge about other systems transfers to MySQL.

Fewer locks are needed (and thus higher concurrency) on the master for the following types of statements:

Fewer locks are required on the slave for any INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE statement.

RBR tends to generate more data that must be logged. This is because, when using row-based replication to replicate a DML statement (such as an UPDATE or DELETE statement), each changed row must be written to the binary log. (When using statement-based replication, only the statement is written to the binary log.) This means that, if the statement changes many rows, row-based replication may write significantly more data to the binary log; this is true even for statements that are rolled back. This also means that taking and restoring from backup can require more time. In addition, the binary log is locked for a longer time to write the data, which may cause concurrency problems.

Deterministic UDFs that generate large BLOB values take longer to replicate with row-based replication than with statement-based replication. This is because, when using row-based replication, the BLOB column data is itself logged, rather than the statement generating the data.

You cannot examine the logs to see what statements were executed, nor can you see on the slave what statements were received from the master and executed.

However, beginning with MySQL 5.1.29, you can see what data was changed using mysqlbinlog with the options --base64-output=DECODE-ROWS and --verbose.

When performing a bulk operation that includes nontransactional storage engines, changes are applied as the statement executes. With row-based replication logging, this means that the binary log is written while the statement is running. On the master, this does not cause problems with concurrency, because tables are locked until the bulk operation terminates. On the slave server, however, tables are not locked while the slave applies changes, because the slave does not know that those changes are part of a bulk operation.

In such cases, if you retrieve data from a table on the master (for example, using SELECT * FROM table_name), the server waits for the bulk operation to complete before executing the SELECT statement, because the table is read-locked. On the slave, the server does not wait (because there is no lock). This means that, until the bulk operation on the slave has completed, you obtain different results for the same SELECT query on the master and on the slave.

This behavior is expected to change in a future MySQL release; however, until it changes, you may prefer to use statement-based replication when your application requires concurrent large bulk inserts and selects.