Re: Local vs. Global Indexes

From: Tanel Põder <tanel.poder.003_at_mail.ee>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:20:30 +0200
Message-ID: <240801c3fc6b$4edca890$73f823d5@porgand>

MessageIn addition, global indexes are inefficient space wise as well, since a global index has to store 10-byte extended rowids in leafs instead of 6-byte restricted ones.

Tanel.

Original Message ----- From: Tanel Põder To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:13 PM Subject: Re: Local vs. Global Indexes

I agree to that.
Building a global index on a 500GB one-billion-row table can really be pain in the ass..

Tanel.

Original Message ----- From: Kevin Toepke To: 'oracle-l_at_freelists.org' Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 2:53 PM Subject: RE: Local vs. Global Indexes

There are a couple reasons that you may want/need to use a global index.

If you have a unique index that does not have the partition key as the leading column, I believe, you need to use a global index.

If you are not using the partition key in your where clause, using a global index will speed the performance of the query.

But I agree, if you can, use local indexes.

Kevin

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ryan [mailto:ryan.gaffuri_at_cox.net] 
      Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:34 PM
      To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
      Subject: Local vs. Global Indexes


      I pretty much only use local indexes. Do any of you use global indexes on partitioned tables and why? 




----------------------------------------------------------------

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html

Received on Thu Feb 26 2004 - 07:17:26 CST