maniekp <maniekpozioma_at_poczta.onet.pl> wrote in message news:<bbgbar$k94$1_at_news.onet.pl>...
> Jusung Yang wrote:
> > maniekp <maniekpozioma_at_poczta.onet.pl> wrote in message news:<bbdmq4$64j$1_at_news.onet.pl>...
> >
> >
> > Things to consider: how long do you keep your data in the fact table?
> > 1 year? 2 years? Each subpartition will store in its own segment.
> > Assuming you keep 2 years worth of data, and you have 20
> > subpartitioins in each and every partition, you will have
> > 365*2*20=14600 segments for the data alone. For each local index you
> > have on the table, 14600 segments will be added. Having so many
> > segments may not be a good thing.
> >
> > Will it be list or hash subpartitioning? If hash, make the number of
> > subpartitions power of 2.
> >
>
> It will be hash partitioning. You are right - 14k segments is not good.
> Do u think that 4 subpartitions is good or maybe 8 ?
>
> thx, maniek
Probably. 4 and 8 seem to be most common number for subpartitions. I
would say test them out in the development environment first, if you
can afford to. Create 8 subpartitions first, merge subpartitions later
into 4, if 8 is not to your liking. Beware of resitrictions on merging
partitions and subpartitions however.
Received on Mon Jun 02 2003 - 21:03:37 CDT
