Re: tough choices

Mark Townsend <markbtownsend_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:<bG7Cc.91523$eu.65695_at_attbi_s02>...
> datab0y_at_yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > Actually, right now I've got several oracle & db2 systems that are
> > using range partitioning.
>
> No you don't. You have DB2 systems using union all views. Everybody has
> union all views.

and MDC which is similar to range partitioning. I probably shouldn't have included it as range partitioning - since it isn't exactly the same. But it's close enough. And it's a breeze to implement, works great, and is free.

It doesn't have all the features that oracle's partitioning has, but it has a nice set of its own. And again - it's free.

> > Of the three techniques
> > Oracle's is the most sophisticated and has the most features probably,
> > though MDC is working fine. Union-alls are the most similar to the
> > Oracle technique though aren't nearly so polished.
>
> There are severe limitations to the union all view approach - as a
> slight indicator, see a current thread in the DB2 newsgroup -
> http://tinyurl.com/34cv5

Having used the union all approach, the only real issue I've bumped into is locking in a real-time high-volume scenario. This isn't an issue however, if you're doing batch processing (like a warehouse), have brief maintenance windows, have lower-volumes, or just cycle tables instead of statically allocate them to a range. It still isn't as polished as oracle partitions, but seems to be working fine. Received on Wed Jun 23 2004 - 08:36:10 CDT