Re: partitioned tables
- From: Tim Gorman <tim@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:39:20 -0700
|
Why use a number to represent a date? There is no advantage
whatsoever, and numerous disadvantages. ...and as Gus pointed out, range partitioning syntax is "VALUES LESS THAN" not "VALUES LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO"... Gus Spier wrote: Of course, it's up to you, but if you set NLS_DATE_FORMAT='YYYYMMDD', you won't need the TXN_DATE_ID. I might also recommend that your partition by range (TXN_DATE_ID) use values less than 20070201 instead of 20070131.-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l |
- Follow-Ups:
- RE: partitioned tables
- From: Kerber, Andrew W.
- RE: partitioned tables
- From: Joe Smith
- RE: partitioned tables
- References:
- partitioned tables
- From: Joe Smith
- Re: partitioned tables
- From: Gus Spier
- partitioned tables
Other related posts:
- » partitioned tables
- » Re: partitioned tables
- » Re: partitioned tables
- » Re: partitioned tables
- » RE: partitioned tables
- » RE: partitioned tables
- » RE: partitioned tables
- » RE: partitioned tables
- » Re: partitioned tables