Re: Challenge: Partitioning is a wrong idea

mikharakiri_nospaum_at_yahoo.com wrote:
> I'm returning to this topic because of rumors that "interval
> partitiong" would be the next new shiny administrative toy.

What do you mean by "interval partitioning"? I've heard that in the context of optimal organization for spatial data structures, but not in the context of table partitioning.

> Some time ago I asked what are the benefits of partitioned table
> compared to partitioned view. Now I ask why partition a table *at all*?

Because you expect to get benefits from doing so.

> Is there logical difference between large and small table?

No, that is why partitioning is part of the physical, not logical, design level.

> Next, why
> partition by a certain column and not the other one?

If you can't figure out which column to partition a table by, there is a good change you shouldn't partition it.

> What range to
> choose?

How long is a piece of string?

> OK, monkey type DBA is not supposed to ask this kind of
> questions, but the idea of "scientific method" popularised by Jonathan
> and the others recently certainly legitimaze it.
>
> It is undeniable that partitioning concept introduces extra
> complications. You have to be aware of many extra technicalities: what
> is partition prunning, what is partition wise join, etc.

You only need to be aware of those things if you need to micromanage the CBO.
> Returning to the "scientific method" theme, a single test case can
> settle the issue once and forever. Create large table, fill in with the
> data, and show how much does it take

How much *what* does it take?

> to accomplish a certain
> administrative tasks in both cases.

Oddly enough, in your own follow-ups to yourself you start spouting off about tasks which do not appear to be "administrative". Are you only interested in "administrative" tasks or with other task too?

> I claim that for any administrative
> task you suggest, I would find a way to accomplish it in reasonable
> time with normal table.

Unfortunately, reorganizing your "normal" table into whatever form is most conducive to the single particular task you need to do at the moment is not feasible for large tables.

Xho

-- 
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service                        $9.95/Month 30GB