Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

On 3/30/2016 10:41 PM, Alvaro Aguayo Garcia-Rada wrote: What I don't understand is the need of a shared storage in this case. It would be a lot better to have the data folder inside each server virtual disk to avoid troubles with the shared storage; I really see no reason for such

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

We are overlaping mails :P What I don't understand is the need of a shared storage in this case. It would be a lot better to have the data folder inside each server virtual disk to avoid troubles with the shared storage; I really see no reason for such configuration here. Now, getting into

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

Hello Alvaro, We running BDR where each PostgreSQL vm is a master and shared storage only on hypervisor level. All vm leave with own virtual disk. Right now we have 2 server for redundancy which have shared network between them. Issue that BDR is working right now see log below. And my

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

What's the purpose of such configuration? Doesn't makes sense for me. The only reasonable case where you would want to put the data folder on a shared storage is for usage with warm standby, where you can have a secondary server which serves as a read-only replica, and can be rpomoted to master

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

Hello Everyone, Is possible recovery from my situation at all ? I was looking on tool which might will help and only bdr_init_copy. If possible initialize second node again ? Also is it good idea enable wal archiving with bdr ? volga629 From: "volga629" To: "John

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

In my case only virtual hosts are use share storage (feed from glusterfs), but actual virtual machines have own separate disks and all PostgreSQL run on separate data directories. volga629 From: "John R Pierce" To: "pgsql-general" Sent:

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

Hello Craig, Is any share storage technology recommended for PostgreSQL in virtual environment ? Ok what I will do is going take backups, shutdown both virtual servers and place all vm use local disk on server only. volga629 From: "Craig Ringer" To: "volga629"

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

On 31 March 2016 at 10:43, Slava Bendersky wrote: > Hello Craig, > The current setup is two server which run libvirt and for storage which > run glusterfs (storage server feed two virtual servers). Right now is no > fencing in place. Each of the nodes have one

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

Hello Craig, The current setup is two server which run libvirt and for storage which run glusterfs (storage server feed two virtual servers). Right now is no fencing in place. Each of the nodes have one PostgreSQL vm with bdr. volga629. From: "Craig Ringer" To:

Re: [GENERAL] bdr replication

On 31 March 2016 at 09:38, Slava Bendersky wrote: > Hello Everyone, > I am looking for suggestion how to recover bdr replication. > The short story we have 2 virtual nodes with share storage. > Can you describe the "shared storage" setup in more detail? In general,

[GENERAL] bdr replication

Hello Everyone, I am looking for suggestion how to recover bdr replication. The short story we have 2 virtual nodes with share storage. Share storage lost power and after I brought all online bdr doesn't work properly. Here are some log 2016-03-30 20:47:26 EDT

Re: [GENERAL] Plpsql connecting to more than one database?

On 3/30/2016 2:52 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote: On 03/30/2016 05:44 PM, John R Pierce wrote: and what if commit db2 fails for any number of reasons? you've already committed db1, so you can't roll it back. this sort of work requires '2pc' (2-phase commit), which is rather gnarly to

Re: [GENERAL] Plpsql connecting to more than one database?

On 3/30/2016 2:02 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote: Have users that are familiar with plpsql and have a process which needs to be done withing transactions in 2 databases. begin in db1 begin in db2 work on 1 work on 2 if work on both dbs worked commit db1 commit db2 and what if commit db2

Re: [GENERAL] Plpsql connecting to more than one database?

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:18 PM, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, Francisco Reyes wrote: > >> Is it possible to have a plpsql program connect to 2 databases? >> >> This seems to imply it, >>

Re: [GENERAL] Plpsql connecting to more than one database?

On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, Francisco Reyes wrote: > Is it possible to have a plpsql program connect to 2 databases? > > This seems to imply it, > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18257003/pl-sql-querying-a-table-on-multiple-databases > > However looking at the postgresql

Re: [GENERAL] Multixacts wraparound monitoring

Pavlov, Vladimir wrote: > Yes, VACUUM helps to solve the problem and the WARNING gone away. > But, the problem is that the VACUUM for the entire database (2.4T) takes over > 7 hours, and it has to run every 15-20 hours (about 300 millions > transactions), otherwise: > ERROR: multixact "members"

Re: [GENERAL] Plpsql connecting to more than one database?

On 03/30/2016 02:02 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote: Is it possible to have a plpsql program connect to 2 databases? This seems to imply it, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18257003/pl-sql-querying-a-table-on-multiple-databases Well the above is referring to Oracle, so is not applicable to

Re: [GENERAL] Multixacts wraparound monitoring

On 03/30/2016 08:03 AM, Pavlov, Vladimir wrote: Yes, VACUUM helps to solve the problem and the WARNING gone away. Okay, so now we are on a different problem. But, the problem is that the VACUUM for the entire database (2.4T) takes over 7 hours, and it has to run every 15-20 hours (about 300

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

Hi Pushkar: On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) wrote: > Does PostgreSQL support a query to fetch last ‘n’ records that match the > selection criteria. I am trying to fetch records from a table with start > date that falls in last 30 days, however, I want

Re: [GENERAL] Multixacts wraparound monitoring

Yes, VACUUM helps to solve the problem and the WARNING gone away. But, the problem is that the VACUUM for the entire database (2.4T) takes over 7 hours, and it has to run every 15-20 hours (about 300 millions transactions), otherwise: ERROR: multixact "members" limit exceeded - and server stops

Re: [GENERAL] Missed LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Merlin Moncure writes: >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Alexander Reshetov >> wrote: >>> As far as I know there is no LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API. >>> Is there some

Re: [GENERAL] pg_restore casts check constraints differently

Amit Langote writes: > destdb=# ALTER TABLE c ADD CONSTRAINT p_a_check CHECK (a IN ('a', 'b', 'c')); > destdb=# \d c > ... > Check constraints: > "p_a_check" CHECK (a::text = ANY (ARRAY['a'::character varying, > 'b'::character varying, 'c'::character

Re: [GENERAL] pg_restore casts check constraints differently

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joshua Ma writes: >> This might not be a common case, but we're using pg_dump in a testing >> environment to check migrations - 1) we initialize the db from HEAD, >> pg_dump it, 2) we initialize the db

Re: [GENERAL] Multixacts wraparound monitoring

On 03/30/2016 06:24 AM, Pavlov, Vladimir wrote: Hello, There is no news? Now I have to do VACUUM every night, so that the server worked. So has the WARNING gone away?: WARNING: oldest multixact is far in the past HINT: Close open transactions with multixacts soon to avoid wraparound

Re: [GENERAL] Missed LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API

Merlin Moncure writes: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Alexander Reshetov > wrote: >> As far as I know there is no LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API. >> Is there some reasons not to support LIMIT clause pushdown? It was impossible to do it

Re: [GENERAL] Multixacts wraparound monitoring

Hello, There is no news? Now I have to do VACUUM every night, so that the server worked. Maybe run VACUUM FREEZE? Kind regards,   Vladimir Pavlov -Original Message- From: Pavlov Vladimir Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 9:55 AM To: 'Alvaro Herrera' Cc: 'Adrian Klaver';

Re: [GENERAL] Missed LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Alexander Reshetov wrote: > Hello, > > As far as I know there is no LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API. > > Is there some reasons not to support LIMIT clause pushdown? > Is there bug-report regarding this (didn't found it though) > or

Re: [GENERAL] pg_largeobject

Sridhar N Bamandlapally wrote: > Is there any way we can change the segment file size,  > > I am trying to look into the possibility of segment file size Vs bytea size > limitation > > PostgreSQL installation > > step 1:  ./configure --enable-largefile --with-segsize (

Re: [GENERAL] pg_largeobject

Is there any way we can change the segment file size, I am trying to look into the possibility of segment file size Vs bytea size limitation PostgreSQL installation step 1: ./configure --enable-largefile --with-segsize ( throwing error "configure: error: Large file support is not enabled.

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

On 30 March 2016 at 11:36, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) wrote: > I am sorry I didn’t clarify my requirement properly.. I want the ‘n’ > oldest records, however, they should sorted with the recent record first > and I want this to happen in the query itself so I don’t have to care

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

Il 30/03/2016 11:36, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) ha scritto: I am sorry I didn’t clarify my requirement properly.. I want the ‘n’ oldest records, however, they should sorted with the recent record first

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

I am sorry I didn’t clarify my requirement properly.. I want the ‘n’ oldest records, however, they should sorted with the recent record first and I want this to happen in the query itself so I don’t have to care about sorting through the application.. From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

Il 30/03/2016 11:19, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) ha scritto: select * from t order by record_date desc limit 5;   this will return the recent 5 records.. what I want is the oldest 5 records (in last 30

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

On 30 March 2016 at 11:19, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) wrote: > select * from t order by record_date desc limit 5; > > > > this will return the recent 5 records.. what I want is the oldest 5 > records (in last 30 days) > > > > *From:* pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto: >

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

select * from t order by record_date desc limit 5; this will return the recent 5 records.. what I want is the oldest 5 records (in last 30 days) From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 12:38

[GENERAL] Missed LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API

Hello, As far as I know there is no LIMIT clause pushdown in FDW API. Is there some reasons not to support LIMIT clause pushdown? Is there bug-report regarding this (didn't found it though) or should it be filled down? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To

Re: [GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

On 3/29/2016 11:40 PM, Deole, Pushkar (Pushkar) wrote: WITH t AS ( SELECT * FROM mytable ORDER BY record_date ASC LIMIT 5 ) SELECT * FROM t ORDER BY record_date DESC; why do it twice when you can just do select * from t order by record_date desc limit 5; -- john r

[GENERAL] Fetching last n records from Posgresql

Hi, Does PostgreSQL support a query to fetch last 'n' records that match the selection criteria. I am trying to fetch records from a table with start date that falls in last 30 days, however, I want to fetch the oldest 'n' records and not the recent ones. I know there is a LIMIT clause which I