Re: Daily partitioning

  • From: "Leyi Zhang (Kamus)" <kamusis@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: s.cislaghi@xxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 23:57:06 +0800

>The whole table may be about 6Gb

If this is the final size of this table (including all partitions), I
don't think it's a must that you divide partitions into several
tablespaces, unless you have some ETL job need transportable
tablespace requirement. Divide into more  tablespaces will not do much
help on query performance on this table, although it's the reason some
person think tablespace separation will do.

Kamus <kamusis@xxxxxxxxx>

Visit my blog for more :

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Stefano Cislaghi <s.cislaghi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 14 May 2010 12:17, Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> A few questions
>> How does data arrive? In a batch load or OLTP?
>> How much data are you talking about?
>> what do typical queries look like?
>> What's the DB version?
> 1. Batch load every nigh
> 2. The whole table may be about 6Gb
> 3. DSS query using date field
> 4. 11gR2
> I do not want to use interval partitioning because I want to divide
> partition in more tbs (interval partitioning will not store with logic
> partition in tbs) and also data are pruned by the batch job and so I do not
> want to have a maintenance to remove old ununsed empty partitions. I'm agree
> with Leyi that 40 partitions are not big, but IMHO 40 partition containing
> 100 mb each one is not really nice.
> Also datafiles are stored in the same DG.
> 11gR2 permits to use partitioning on virtual column, and so I can create a
> virtual column that retrieve day of week and partition with this.
> But...virtual column may be not visibile for users?
> --

Other related posts: