RE: anyone ever use sub-partitioning?

From: Jamadagni, Rajendra <Rajendra.Jamadagni_at_espn.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:44:32 -0400
Message-ID: <A186CBDC8B1D61438BC50F1A77E91F73075BD56F@xchgbrsm1.corp.espn.pvt>

We tried on one of out most active OLTP table, turns out there is bug in 9202 with dbms_stats and not being able to maintain global level, partition level stats correctly in some circumstances. So, we went back to regular table.

Raj

--------=20

Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com=20 All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.=20 select standard_disclaimer from company_requirements;=20 QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of ryan.gaffuri_at_cox.net Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 10:27 AM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: anyone ever use sub-partitioning?

We have a table which is about 8GB with about 8 billion records. We add deltas to the file daily(inserts,updates,deletes).

We are considering paritioning this table so we can use parallel DML. We are considering partitioning on the primary key to about 10-20 partitions.=20

Has anyone used hash sub-partitioning? What are your experiences with that? I'd like to have granularity smaller than 400-800 MB per partition.=20

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

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

Received on Fri Apr 30 2004 - 09:42:35 CDT