| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: partitioned tables
The logical design team seems to think that the date as a number datatype will speed up queries. Not true?
thanks.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:39:20 -0700From: tim_at_evdbt.comTo: oracle-l_at_freelists.orgSubject: Re: partitioned tables Why use a number to represent a date? There is no advantage whatsoever, and numerous disadvantages....and as Gus pointed out, range partitioning syntax is "VALUES LESS THAN" not "VALUES LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO"...Gus Spier wrote: Of course, it's up to you, but if you set NLS_DATE_FORMAT='YYYYMMDD', you won't need the TXN_DATE_ID. I might also recommend that your partition by range (TXN_DATE_ID) use values less than 20070201 instead of 20070131. r,Gus On Dec 11, 2007 4:51 PM, Joe Smith <joe_dba_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
My primary key is a composite of 3 columns, but I range parition only on one column. It that a problem? I know it is a date field, but we are using a number for a date, i.e. yyyymmdd. Would I need to set up a partitioned tablespace for the index, i.e. PK? CREATE TABLE F_MBR_ACCT_TRANSACTION(MBR_ACCT_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,TXN_DATE_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,SPONSOR_TRAN_ID INTEGER NOT NULL ,TXN_DTTM DATE NULL , TXN_AMOUNT NUMBER(14,2) NULL CONSTRAINT F_MBR_ACCT_TRANSACTION_PK PRIMARY KEY (MBR_ACCT_ID,TXN_DATE_ID,SPONSOR_TRAN_ID))partion by range (TXN_DATE_ID)(partition jan_2007 values less than (20070131) tablespace smart_part_jan_2007, partition feb_2007 values less than (20070228) tablespace smart_part_feb_2007, . . . partition jan_2007 values less than (20071231) tablespace smart_part_dec_2007);
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live. Share now!-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Wed Dec 12 2007 - 07:28:57 CST
 |
 |