I have waited many long nights while sysadmins that I know have had to restore mySQL databases from backup or re-clone replicas from the original on mySQL clusters. I was seeing repeated cases where the replication stops, but claims that it is still going, cases where it would corrupt a copy to the point where it was easier and faster to recreate it, as well as issues with the daisy-chain approach to replication where the replicas downstream of the box that first had a problem suffered as well (sometimes recoverably once the problem box was fixed, other times not so)
this was without any system crashes
no, I don't know of Internet links that document this.
my prior post was intended to make the point that doing a google search for "mysql replication horror story" and not finding a real one in the first ten hits has very little, if anything to do with the quality or lack of quality of mysql (or postgres) replication.
I never like to hear of anyone loosing their data, but to then make the claim that if the replication tool was built-in instead of a seperate project it would not have happened, and that mysql 'just works' as an example of this always being true is just not a valid chain of logic.