Re: partitioned table advice

You don't have that much data. You have about 70,000 rows. One thing puzzles me though. You say you do a select distinct on the primary key and get the results below. A primary key by definition is unique so how can you have repeats? I think you mean that in a particular column that is used in the where clause a lot you have the following distribution...

Try adding an index on the column and compressing the index. That will make the index rather small and might help.

You could do some empirical testing using tkprof and see what gives you better results.

(one thing to do is upgrade to a supported version, I don't think 8.05 is supported any more.)
Jim

"Ed Stevens" <Ed_Stevens_at_nospam.noway.nohow> wrote in message news:3c193f41.87010724_at_ausnews.austin.ibm.com...
> Platform; Oracle 8.0.5 SE, NT4
>
> We've never used a partitioned table before, but I'm looking at a
candidate. A
> SELECT DISTINCT on the primary key shows seven different values. The
> distribution of rows across these values is as follows:
>
> value 1 - 17,814 rows
> value 2 - 322 rows
> value 3 - 36,976 rows
> value 4 - 29,580 rows
> value 5 - 228 rows
> value 6 - 1,565 rows
> value 7 - 371 rows
>
> The app is heavy in queries with a "WHERE =" on this column.
>
> Would the skewing of the column values argue for or against partitioning
on this
> column? Or is the answer still "it depends -- we need more info about
which
> distinct values are most often queried."
>
>
> --
> Ed Stevens
> (Opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of my employer.)
Received on Thu Dec 13 2001 - 19:11:48 CST