Re: Storage Claus on Partitioned Global Index

From: UXDBA <>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:07:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

On Nov 18, 11:53 am, Noons <> wrote:
> Steve Howard wrote,on my timestamp of 18/11/2009 1:38 PM:
> > This would make sense for the original partitions at creation, but I
> > don't understand why a split (which effectively adds a new partition
> > P4 in my example without a tablespace clause) doesn't go into the
> > "default" USERS tablespace (whatever that means).
> The split is from an existing partition, which is in a given tablespace.  The
> result should go into same tablespace, in the absence of any instructions saying
> otherwise.  It "inherits" defaults from the original partition.
> Or at least that's my reading of the doco and what I've seen so far.
> >> "Any attributes you do not specify are inherited from the original
> >> partition."  Of course, that is talking about tables, so the docs
> >> ought to mention the same thing about indices.
> Hmmm, I've found that when it comes to partitions, indexes tend to "behave" very
> much as tables do - as far as syntax goes, of course.
> > I'm not sure what "original partition" means in that case?  What if I
> > created two partitions in two different tablespaces "originally"?
> At a guess and without trying:
> partition 1, in tablespace one, split, two resulting partitions end up in
> tablespace one.
> partition 2, in tablespace two, split, two resulting partitions end up in
> tablespace two.
> Assuming of course defaults.
> Now: if someone can show me how to make sure partitions compress the same as a
> non-partitioned table...
> I've just hit that one a few weeks ago, with
> Non-partitioned table, compressed: smaller size than original.
> Partitioned with compression: same total size as original uncompressed.
> Meh!...

thanks all for your investigations. Received on Wed Nov 18 2009 - 09:07:30 CST

Original text of this message