Mysql Router not sending Write request to R/W instance

I am doing InnoDB Cluster Group Replication for the first time. I stuck at the last step Mysql Router. Mysql Router is configured with bootstrapping, But the main issue is MySQL router does not send the write request to the Primary R/W instance after failover. After failover primary become node instance and the Error says The MySQL server is running with the –super-read-only option so it cannot execute this statement

I am following this tutorial https://severalnines.com/database-blog/mysql-innodb-cluster-80-complete-deployment-walk-through-part-one.

Thanks in advance

Does a person know who is on the other end of a sending stone?

At the end of the last session my players took out an enemy NPC who was using a sending stone while on the lookout for the rest of the gang they are sneaking up on.

I am fully expecting them to try and use the stone to pretend all is well, my gut feeling is to allow it, it is a clever use of a simple magical item to throw the enemy off track.

However I just wanted to make sure that mechanically this makes sense, I am pretty sure a sending stone is not like a radio, you don’t hear the other persons voice. But would a wielder know someone different is on the other end or is this a DM decision thing?

Can a known recipient of sending via sending stones conceal their identity?

A character has discovered one of a pair of sending stones in a D&D 5e game. They can use the stone to cast sending, with the target being the holder of the other stone. The person holding the other stone, who we’ll call the "recipient", is in fact someone that the character knows, but they are unaware that it is the recipient who holds the other stone, and the recipient does not want them to know. Can the recipient reply to the sending while concealing their identity from the character?

The question of the caster of sending concealing their identity has already been addressed in Is there any way to fake/conceal your identity when casting Sending?, and the caster cannot conceal their identity because sending says:

You send a short message of twenty-five words or less to a creature with which you are familiar. The creature hears the message in its mind, recognizes you as the sender if it knows you, and can answer in a like manner immediately.

This does not address whether the recipient can conceal their identity, but this is because the caster of sending must be familiar with the recipient in order to cast the spell. It’s therefore reasonable to assume that the recipient’s "reply", which is sent "in a like manner", will mean that the caster will recognise the identity of the recipient, because the caster knows the recipient, and because the caster knows who they targeted with the spell.

However, sending stones bypass this familiarity requirement:

While you touch one stone, you can use an action to cast the sending spell from it. The target is the bearer of the other stone.

There is no indication here that the user of a sending stone must be familiar with the recipient, who holds the matching stone. (And such a requirement would make sending stones considerably less useful! So I think it’s reasonable to assume that the user of a stone is not required to know the holder of the other stone.)

However, in the situation I’m describing, the "caster" is familiar with the recipient, but the recipient does not want them to know who the recipient is.

Obviously, the recipient can refuse to respond. However, it’s a lot more fun if the recipient can respond, while concealing their identity. So… is there a way for a known recipient of sending cast via sending stones to conceal their identity?

Use of additional magical items or spells by the recipient (such as the ring of mind shielding suggested in an answer to the linked question) is acceptable in an answer.

How quickly must a creature respond to the spell Sending?

Sending (PHB.274): (emphasis mine)

Casting Time: 1 action […]

Duration: 1 round […]

You send a short Message of twenty-five words or less to a creature with you are familiar. The creature hears the Message in its mind, recognizes you as the sender if it knows you, and can answer in a like manner immediately. The spell enables creatures with Intelligence scores of at least 1 to understand the meaning of your Message. […]

What constitutes immediately? The spell has a casting time of 1 action, and a duration of 1 round. Does the 1 round make up how long the caster has to send the message after the spell has been cast? Does that same time restriction apply to the receiver? Do both messages have to fit within the same round? Or does the 1 round represent the time it takes for the spell to arrive at the receiver?

Can you identify telepathically received messages sent through spells like Sending as magical via Detect Magic?

An enemy casts Sending to communicate with a player from far away. In this example, the player character doesn’t know anything about the Sending spell and he might think he is just hearing voices or going crazy.

Another player casts Detect Magic to scan the area. Can this player detect the presence of the telepathic message inside the first players head via Detect Magic as an evocation spell.

Is there need for messengers in DnD 5e, if spell Sending exists?

In my campaign (DnD 5e) I would like to send players on a quest to save a kidnapped person. The person has high value information. He/she was ambushed and taken prisoner.

My question is: is there a logical reason for sending a person to deliver a message instead of using 3rd level spell Sending? The spell has no range limitations, and message can be up to 25 words long. What are good reasons for not using a spell? The sender and the receiver would both have resources to hire a Wizard, Bard or Cleric to cast spell, so not using the spell option should be more complex than just “Caster is not available”. In addition the length of a message is less than 25 words.

I would like to keep the idea of sending party on a rescue mission, just need a logical reason for doing so.

WordPress ajax serial processing of and sending

I want to install/activate plugins via ajax.But i want to add a loading class on plugins list item which is being installing or activating. In jquery If i want to do it i need to write a lot bunch of code there.For example I have 4 plugins to install.So i have to first, send first ajax request to install first plugin then when a response comes I send second request in success block but its too time consuming. I want to know if there is any easy solution. Or in php file can i send a response back then continue installing 2nd one. Is that possible??

Why can’t we encrypt the message with sender’s private key and receiver’s public key in case of sending messages through a server?

I read that why do we need E2EE and can’t rely only on HTTPS for sending messages through a messaging app. The reason which i understood is when sender sends the message to the server, the TLS connection is associated with the server. TLS terminates at the server and whoever controls the server has the ability to view the messages since they are not encrypted.But, In this process when we send a message to the server, we are firstly encrypting the message with sender’s private key and then with server’s public key.

My question is why can’t we encrypt the message with sender’s private key and then receiver’s public key? In this way, even if it reaches server, it won’t be able to view anything since it can only be decrypted using receiver’s private key.

If this is possible, then why do we use methods like Diffie Hellman key exchange?