Re: partiioning option not worth it?

I don't believe you, or anyone else, can implement the functionality PO provides for the price quoted. Either you don't understand the full functionality or you don't understand the costs involved which are substantially greater than one developer's salary.

Daniel Morgan

Keith Boulton wrote:

> What's your point?
>
> damorgan <dan.morgan_at_ci.seattle.wa.us> wrote in message
> news:3C75697F.9DA1E7B9_at_ci.seattle.wa.us...
> > With 30+ years in the industry I take strong exception to your responses
> below.
> > Real world experience dictates otherwise unless your IT/IS department ...
> is
> > just you.
> >
> > Daniel Morgan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Keith Boulton wrote:
> >
> > > Stefan <sroesch3_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> > > news:mP3d8.6609$Iw.14214_at_rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> > >
> > > > In DW environments it is mandatory.
> > >
> > > That's what the salesman wants you to think!
> > >
> > > > How will you implement the sliding window technique without support
> from
> > > the
> > > > database.
> > > There is (effectively) no difference in this regard between partitioning
> and
> > > building N tables.
> > >
> > > > How will you implement automatic partition pruning?
> > > It's not automatic, but I can do it "manually" for less than £40,000 and
> > > that's the saving on only one server.
> > >
> > > > How will you implement parallel DML? and so on....
> > > Again, I don't see this a particularly difficult process.
> > >
> > > > To conclude that. In DW environments it makes sense to spend that
> money
> > > It MAY make sense - but as I've said before, the cost/benefit
> calculation is
> > > rarely done.
> > >
> > > > you also get further features with the enterprise edition which are
> needed
> > > > in these environments.
> > > and these would be?
> >
Received on Thu Feb 21 2002 - 18:28:32 CST