Re: Newbie Question on Partitions

Paul,
you know I hadn't thought of that. That just might do the trick. I shall ponder some more. Thanks for the idea!

Matt.

"Paul Dixon" <paul.gp.dixon_at_bttinnedham.com> wrote in message news:b302lt$b99$1_at_pheidippides.axion.bt.co.uk...
>
> "M2" <me_at_quietplaceiwithnospam.com> wrote in message
> news:T8d4a.77$Aq3.14282_at_news.optus.net.au...
> > I'm sorry (and possible embarrased) to say that actually was what I was
> > suggesting. I work for an education institution and need to gracefully
> move
> > out old session data to keep sizes down. The sessions start and end on
> > different dates each year and the systems provided for these often don't
> > start on the start of session anyway. This didn't seem to fit any mold
for
> > identifying it's destination partition at the time of insert.
> >
> > So how do you efficiently deal with something like this where
information
> > needs to move from one partition to another post creation?
> >
> > Is partitioning maybe not the way to go? All I am really after is a way
to
> > flag a (large) group of rows to be archived using an external process
> (it's
> > complicated logic). After doing this I want to be able to move the data
> off
> > to the warehouse and recover the space in the production system with as
> > little effect on the production system as possible.
>
> Matt,
>
> I don't know whether this fits in with the "complicated logic" you use for
> archiving, but rather than moving data to a different partion when it
> becomes "old" why not periodically create additional partitions to receive
> "new" session data. Eventually at some point in time a previous partition
> would only contain data that meets your "old" criteria and could be
> processed accordingly.
>
> Paul Dixon
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Feb 19 2003 - 20:56:59 CST