Re: composite partition table

As usual, it depends on your use.
The overhead on composites is simple that you have more segments to check for data if your query does not eliminate on either the partition or subpartition columns. For 'small' queries and large numbers of segments the overhead can be a large fraction of the cost; for large volume queries it may be a minor fraction.

Overheads on insert/delete - the best bet is to try it with your volume of data. On single row inserts I would expect an overhead of 50 - 100%. For large inserts using array inserts where the data was ordered by partition and subpartition I would expect something in the order of 5 - 10% overhead.

--

Jonathan Lewis
Yet another Oracle-related web site: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

tedchyn_at_yahoo.com wrote in message <7u313u$epu$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Sir:
>
> Can anybody shed light on the following questions.
>1.what are the drawbacks for composite partition table ?
>
>2. what are the additional overhead for composite partition table vs
> regular table for delete and inserting (since hash is involved)?
>
Received on Fri Oct 15 1999 - 16:18:57 CDT