Re: Limit on number of values for list partition?

From: Howard J. Rogers <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 18:57:18 +1100
Message-ID: <pan.2003.03.04.07.57.17.327346@yahoo.com.au>

On Tue, 04 Mar 2003 00:03:28 +0000, M2 wrote:

> Hi All,
> I am thinking of using list based partitioning for a date warehousing
> application. In order to have range based partitioning work for me I would
> need to have as many as a 1000-2000 values. Would these kinds of numbers
> work? Would they be efficient?
>

I'm a bit confused. List partition is one thing, and range partitioning is another. Range partitioning is good for continuum (particularly date-based) distributions of data. List partitioning is good for explaining to Oracle that you see a relationship between things which it wouldn't have a clue about (eg, group together NY, MD, CT and NJ in "NORTH_EAST" and stick TX, AZ and CA in "WEST"... there's no alphabetic rhymne nor reason to such a grouping, but you see it and understand it).

If it is truly list partitioning you are after, then you are restricted to a list of values of 4000 bytes in length per partition. For your 1000 to 2000 values, you'd have to be talking about no more than 4, and possibly just two, characters per value.

Regards
HJR
> Matt.
Received on Tue Mar 04 2003 - 01:57:18 CST