Re: Overhead of table with empty partitions

From: <TESTAJ3_at_nationwide.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 12:13:40 -0400
Message-ID: <OF4ABC1DD3.5A6E99F2-ON85257457.005913B4-85257457.00592463@lnotes-gw.ent.nwie.net>

That is the case I've seen thru the years, just make sure you're doing table/partition/subpartition stats and on the associated indexes.

Joe

---

You can have it: Fast, Right or Cheap, pick 2 of the 3. Fast + Right is Expensive
Fast + Cheap will be incorrect.
Right + Cheap will take a while.

"John Thompson" <jhthomp_at_gmail.com>
 

Sent by: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org

05/28/2008 11:57 AM
Please respond to jhthomp_at_gmail.com

From
"John Thompson" <jhthomp_at_gmail.com>

To
"oracle-l_at_freelists.org" <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
cc

Subject
Overhead of table with empty partitions

Say I've got a table that's partitioned by day and has 30 days worth of partitions. Every 30 days I'll create another 30 days worth of partitions and drop the previous 30 days worth. Stats are running everyday so the thinking is that having 29 or so days worth of empty partitoins will not cause any SQL performance issues. Testing has shown this to be the case, but wanted to see if there's any insight on having many empty partitions.

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Wed May 28 2008 - 11:13:40 CDT