Re: partitioning necessary?

Thomas Blankschein wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have one table in our database with ~700 million rows. The table
is index
> organized and we are very happy with the performance.
> During the next 1-2 years we expect ~3-4 billion rows in this table.
Shall
> we consider partitioning? We use 9.2 standard, so we have to licence
the
> option with extra costs. If the performance is ok and our DBAs have
no probs
> with management, is it ok to leave this big table as it is?

If all you ever do is access by a specific index value, it just may be. But if you do any other kind of access, such as a range, or deletes, you better test it, because... "it depends." Also, a lot depends on how you add to IOT's, since rows can move around, and if you have indexes on the IOT, its "guess" as to where the row actually is can degrade over time. And whether you need 7 day access, as you may need to rebuild it... See Jonathan Lewis' book, even though the IOT parts may be dated, it shows things to consider and test.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
I know!  Let's privatize Social Security!
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041221/news_1b21jones.html