Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: partitioned tables
Not true.
The logical design team seems to think that the date as a number datatype will speed up queries. Not true?-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Wed Dec 12 2007 - 17:07:25 CST
thanks.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:39:20 -0700
From: tim@evdbt.com
To: oracle-l@freelists.org
Subject: Re: partitioned tables
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
r,
Gus
On Dec 11, 2007 4:51 PM, Joe Smith <joe_dba@hotmail.com> wrote:
My primary key is a composite of 3 columns, but I range parition only on one column.
It that a problem?
I know it is a date field, but we are using a number for a date, i.e. yyyymmdd.
Would I need to set up a partitioned tablespace for the index, i.e. PK?
CREATE TABLE F_MBR_ACCT_TRANSACTION
(
MBR_ACCT_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,
TXN_DATE_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,
SPONSOR_TRAN_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,
TXN_DTTM DATE NULL ,
TXN_AMOUNT NUMBER(14,2) NULL
CONSTRAINT F_MBR_ACCT_TRANSACTION_PK PRIMARY KEY (MBR_ACCT_ID,TXN_DATE_ID,SPONSOR_TRAN_ID))
partion by range (TXN_DATE_ID)
(partition jan_2007 values less than (20070131) tablespace smart_part_jan_2007,
partition feb_2007 values less than (20070228) tablespace smart_part_feb_2007,
.
.
.
partition jan_2007 values less than (20071231) tablespace smart_part_dec_2007);
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live. Share now!
The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360 Console. Get it now!