Oracle Gather Statistics after Partition Exchange - oracle12c

Database: Oracle 12c
I have a process that selects data from Fact Table, summarizes it and push it to Summary Table.
Summary table is Range Partitioned (Trade Date) and List Partitioned (File Id).
the process picks up data from Fact table (where file_id=<> for all Trade Dates), summarizes it in a temp table and use Partition Exchange to move data from Temp table to one of the SubPartitions in Summary Table (as the process works on a File Id level).
Summary table is completely refreshed everyday (100% data will be exchanged).
Before the data is exchanged at the subpartition level, statistics are gathered and exchanged along with the data.
After the process is completed, we run dbms_gather_table_stats at partition level (in a for loop - for each partition) with granularity set as "approx_global and partition".
Even though we collect stats at the global level, user_tab_statistics for the summary table has "STALE_STATS" = YES for this table, however, partition & Subpartition stats are available.
when we run a query against the summary table (for a date range of 3 years), the query spins for a long time - spiking the CPU to 90%, but never returns any data.
I checked the explain plan on the query, Cardinality is showing as 1.
I read about incremental stats, but it seems increment will work if a few partitions change - it may not be the best option in my case, where data across all the partitions change completely.
I m looking for a strategy to gather statistics on the summary table - don't want to run a full gather stats.
Thanks.

Related

PostgreSQL Table size and partition consideration

I am working on a use case where initial data load for name table in PostgreSQL DB will be around 650 million rows with average row size of 0.6 KB bringing table size up to 400 GB. After that there could be up to 20,000 inserts or updates on daily basis.
I am new to PostgreSQL, want to check if I should consider partitioning looking at the table size.
Updating some information from Comments section:
It is an OLTP application for Identity resolution for business names, this is one specific table where all the business names are stored along with the metadata such as Start Date, End Date and any incoming name is matched with existing names to identify if it is related to another business. This table is updated throughout the day using batch files from different data sources.
Also, we are not planning to expire or remove any data from this table.

What is the best way to move millions of data from one postgres database to another?

So we have a task at the moment where I need to move millions of records from one database to another.
To complicate things slightly I need to change an id on each record before inserting the data.
How it works is we have 100 stations in database a.
Each station contains 30+ sensors.
Each sensor contains readings for about the last 10 years.
These readings are anywhere from 15minute interval to daily interval.
So each station can have at least 5m records.
database b has the same structure as database a.
The reading table contains the following fields
id: primary key
sensor_id: int4
value: numeric(12)
time: timestamp
What I have done so far for one station is.
Connect to database a and select all readings for station 1
Find all corresponding sensors in database b
Change the sensor_id from database a to it's new sensor_id from database b
Chunk the updated sensor_id data to groups of about 5000 parameters
Loop over the chunks and do a mass insert
In theory, this should work.
However, I am getting errors saying duplicate key violates unique constraint.
If I query the database on those records that are failing, the data doesn't exist.
The weird thing about this is that if I run the script 4 or 5 times in a row all the data eventually gets in there. So I am at a loss as to why I would be receiving this error because it doesn't seem accurate.
Is there a way I can get around this error from happening?
Is there a more efficient way of doing this?

Union with Redshift native tables and external tables (Spectrum)

If I have a view that contains a union between a native table and external table like so (pseudocode):
create view vwPageViews as
select from PageViews
union all
select from PageViewsHistory
PageViews has for the last 2 years. External table has for older data than 2 years.
If a user selects from the view with filters for the last 6 months, how does RS Spectrum handle it - does it read the entire external table even though none will be returned (and accordingly cost us money for all of it)? (Assuming the s3 files are parquet based).
ex.
Select from vwPageViews where MyDate >= '01/01/2021'
What's the best approach for querying both cold and historical data using RS and Spectrum? Thanks!
How this will happen on Spectrum will depend on whether or not you have provided partitions for the data in S3. Without partitions (and a where clause on the partition) the Spectrum engines in S3 will have to read every file to determine if the needed data is in any of them. The cost of this will depend on the number and size of the files AND what format they are in. (CSV is more expensive than Parquet for example.)
The way around this is to partition the data in S3 and to have a WHERE clause on the partition value. This will exclude files from needing to be read when they don't match on the partition value.
The rub is in providing the WHERE clause for the partition as this will likely be less granular than the date or timestamp you using in your base data. For example if you partition on YearMonth (YYYYMM) and want to have a day level WHERE clause you will need to 2 parts to the WHERE clause - WHERE date_col >= 2015-07-12 AND part_col >= 201507. How to produce both WHERE conditions will depend on your solution around Redshift.

How to Handle Rows that Change over Time in Druid

I'm wondering how we could handle data that changes over time in Druid. I realize that Druid is built for streaming data where we wouldn't expect a particular row to have data elements change. However, I'm working on a project where we want to stream transactional data from a logistics management system, but there's a calculation that happens in that system that can change for a particular transaction based on other transactions. What I mean:
-9th of the month - I post transaction A with a date of today (9th) that results in the stock on hand coming to 0 units
-10th of the month - I post transaction B with a date of the 1st of the month, crediting my stock amount by 10 units. At this time (on the 10th of the month) the stock on hand for transaction A recalculates to 10 units. The same would be true for ALL transactions after the 1st of the month
As I understand it, we would re-extract transaction A, resulting in transaction A2.
The stock on hand dimension is incredibly important to our metrics. Specifically, identifying when stockouts occur (when stock on hand = 0). In the above example, if I have two rows for transaction A, I would be mistakenly identifying a stockout with transaction A1, whereas transaction A2 is the source of truth.
Is there any ability to archive a row and replace it with an updated row, or do we need to add logic to our queries that finds the rows with the freshest timestamp per transaction id?
Thanks
I have two thoughts that I hope help you. The key documentation for this is "Updating Existing Data": http://druid.io/docs/latest/ingestion/update-existing-data.html which gives you three options: Lookup Tables, Reindexing, and Delta Ingestion. The last one, Delta Ingestion, is only for adding new rows to old segments, so that's not very useful for you, let's go over the other two.
Reindexing: You can crunch all the numbers that change in your ETL process, identify the segments that would need to be reloaded, and simply have Druid re-index those segments. That will replace the stock-on-hand value for A in your example whenever you want, whenever you do the re-indexing.
Lookups: If you have stock values for multiple products, you can store the product id in the segment and have that be immutable, but lookup the stock-on-hand value in a lookup. So, you would store:
A, 2018-01-01, product-id: 123
And in your lookup, you'd have:
product-id: 123, stock-on-hand: 0
And later, you'd update the lookup and change that to 10. This would update any rows that reference product-id: 123.
I can't be sure but you may be mixing up dimensions and metrics while you're doing this, and you may need to read over that terminology in OLAP descriptions like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_analytical_processing
Good luck!

long running queries and new data

I'm looking at a postgres system with tables containing 10 or 100's of millions of rows, and being fed at a rate of a few rows per second.
I need to do some processing on the rows of these tables, so I plan to run some simple select queries: select * with a where clause based on a range (each row contains a timestamp, that's what I'll work with for ranges). It may be a "closed range", with a start and an end I know are contained in the table, and I know no new data will fall into the range, or an open range : ie one of the range boundary might not be "in the table yet" and rows being fed in the table might thus fall in that range.
Since the response will itself contains millions of rows, and the processing per row can take some time (10s of ms) I'm fully aware I'll use a cursor and fetch, say, a few 1000 rows at a time. My question is:
If I run an "open range" query: will I only get the result as it was when I started the query, or will new rows being inserted in the table that fall in the range while I run my fetch show up ?
(I tend to think that no I won't see new rows, but I'd like a confirmation...)
updated
It should not happen under any isolation level:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/transaction-iso.html
but Postgres insures it only in Serializable isolation
Well, I think when you make a query, that means you create a new transaction and it will not receive/update data from any other transaction until it commit.
So, basically "you only get the result as it was when you started the query"