Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] [SQL] pg_multixact issues

2014-09-26 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.com wrote:

 Apologies for the delay, was working/troubleshooting same issue and was
 away from my emails. :(
 Regards...


Received the database with huge pg_multixact directory of size 21G and
there are ~82,000 files in pg_multixact/members and 202 files in
pg_multixact/offsets directory.

Did run vacuum full on this database and it was successful. However now
am not sure about pg_multixact directory. truncating this directory except
 file results into database start up issues, of course this is not
correct way of truncating.
 FATAL:  could not access status of transaction 13224692

Stumped ! Please provide some comments on how to truncate pg_multixact
files and if there is any impact because of these files on database
performance.

Regards...


Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] [SQL] pg_multixact issues

2014-09-19 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:

 Yes: Learning some patience. You'd given the previous answer two hours
 before this one. Nobody is paid to work on this list...


Apologies for the delay, was working/troubleshooting same issue and was
away from my emails. :(

Regards...


Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] [SQL] pg_multixact issues

2014-09-18 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
 wrote:

 I don't think that's relevant for you.

 Did you upgrade the database using pg_upgrade?


 That's correct! No, there is no upgrade here.


 Can you show pg_controldata output and the output of 'SELECT oid,
 datname, relfrozenxid, age(relfrozenxid), relminmxid FROM pg_database;'?


 Here are the details:
  oid   datname datfrozenxidage(datfrozenxid)datminmxid
 16384 myDB1673 10872259 1

 Additionally wanted to mention couple more points here:
 When I try to run vacuum full on this machine then facing following
 issue:
  INFO:  vacuuming myDB.mytable
  ERROR:  MultiXactId 3622035 has not been created yet -- apparent
 wraparound

 No Select statements are working on this table, is the table corrupt?


Any inputs/hints/tips here?


Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Case sensitivity

2013-12-12 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.comwrote:

 + hackers



 On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.comwrote:

 Actually for searches lower will work.
 But the other important aspect is 'inserts' which would result 2 rows if
 the values are 'A' and 'a'. Intent here to have it case insensitive.

 If CITEXT it will update the same row and works.
 CITEXT is an alternative but was wondering if there is any other
 alternate solution/setting while creating database.

 Also does CITEXT fetch via JDBC works the same way as fetch/set string
 values? Any quick comments here.

 http://techie-experience.blogspot.in/2013/04/hibernate-supporting-case-insensitive.html

 Regards...


 Also if the key columns are CITEXT is there any performance issues on
 indexes?

 I am ok with CITEXT but for changing the database design for the
primary/foreign key columns to be CITEXT need some suggestions/comments
regarding performance for inserts/reads.

Awaiting...


Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Case sensitivity

2013-12-11 Thread Dev Kumkar
+ hackers


On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.comwrote:

 Actually for searches lower will work.
 But the other important aspect is 'inserts' which would result 2 rows if
 the values are 'A' and 'a'. Intent here to have it case insensitive.

 If CITEXT it will update the same row and works.
 CITEXT is an alternative but was wondering if there is any other
 alternate solution/setting while creating database.

 Also does CITEXT fetch via JDBC works the same way as fetch/set string
 values? Any quick comments here.

 http://techie-experience.blogspot.in/2013/04/hibernate-supporting-case-insensitive.html

 Regards...


 Also if the key columns are CITEXT is there any performance issues on
 indexes?



[HACKERS] Grouping Sets

2013-07-04 Thread Dev Kumkar
 http://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers/since/200905171950Hello,

Am looking for the patch related to 'Implementation of GROUPING SETS'.
Where can get this from?

Related thread:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/162867790905121420p7c910054x24d8e327abd58...@mail.gmail.com

Regards...


Re: [HACKERS] Grouping Sets

2013-07-04 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hello

 I don't work on this topic now, and my code is not usable for production.


Ok, no problem. Will await for any other pointers regarding any related
patch here.

Currently using UNION to archive similar results but looking if anything is
already done here.

Looks like GROUPING SET was in the TODO list long back.
http://grokbase.com/t/postgresql/pgsql-general/06aaa4g7cq/cube-rollup-grouping-sets

Am I missing anything here?

Regards...


Re: [HACKERS] Grouping Sets

2013-07-04 Thread Dev Kumkar
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Ok, no problem. Will await for any other pointers regarding any related
  patch here.
 
  Currently using UNION to archive similar results but looking if anything
 is
  already done here.
 
  Looks like GROUPING SET was in the TODO list long back.
 
 http://grokbase.com/t/postgresql/pgsql-general/06aaa4g7cq/cube-rollup-grouping-sets
 
  Am I missing anything here?
 
  Regards...

 Me and RhodiumToad discussed the idea recently, after David Fetter
 suggested that we work on it. We may start work on it soon, haven't
 thought in detail yet though.


Ok, 9.3 feature wise looks all done.

So I believe it will be in any 9.3 + release?

Till then will continue UNION approach as looks like it gives the necessary
functionality. Any loopholes here friends?

Regards...


[HACKERS] on existing update construct

2013-05-15 Thread Dev Kumkar
Hello,

Is there an alternative of Sybase on existing update construct in pgsql.

ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE doesn't work.

Thanks in advance!

Regards - Dev


Re: [HACKERS] on existing update construct

2013-05-15 Thread Dev Kumkar
Well ya, stored procedure also was thinking about pre-insert trigger.

Am sure folks here must have gone thru this and had alternatives. Also was
reading about merge_by_key.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com wrote:

 On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Dev Kumkar devdas.kum...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Hello,
 
  Is there an alternative of Sybase on existing update construct in
 pgsql.
 
  ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE doesn't work.
 
  Thanks in advance!

 No, you'll have to either handle this in the application or use a
 stored procedure at this time.  The omission of such a construct from
 psql's \h command and the manual is not in error.



Re: [HACKERS] on existing update construct

2013-05-15 Thread Dev Kumkar
 Please do not top-post on the PostgreSQL lists. See 
http://idallen.com/topposting.html
 Also, note that pgsql-hackers is entirely the wrong list for this sort of
question. You should have been asking on pgsql-general.
Apologies for top-post!
Well I thought pgsql-hackers will suggest some new solution was just going
by the description of mailing-list. Its worth looking into
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1109061/insert-on-duplicate-update-postgresql

Let me know and I will post this question on pgsql-general.

 It's been on the TODO list forever.  It's harder to implement well than
 you would think.
Yes, I think it be nice to see this in one of the upcoming releases.

Thanks!


Re: [HACKERS] on existing update construct

2013-05-15 Thread Dev Kumkar
Basically I was referring to this link http://mbk.projects.postgresql.org

Any suggestions here?

Thanks!


[HACKERS] Facing authentication error on postgres 9.2 - dblink functions

2013-02-06 Thread Dev Kumkar
Hello Everyone,

I am using postgres 9.2 and when executing function dblink facing a fatal
error while trying to execute dblink_connect as follows:

   * SELECT * FROM dblink_connect('host=127.0.0.1 port=5432 dbname=postgres
password=test')*

*ERROR*: could not establish connection DETAIL: FATAL: password
authentication failed for user NETWORK SERVICE

What this error is related to? Do I need to modify pg_hba.conf file by any
chance?

Thanks..