Doubt in subpartitioning of a table

Question

hi gems...good evening..
I have a table which previously had only range partitions.
Now I changed it to range-hash composite partitioning.
There are 6 partition tablespaces namely TS_PART1, TS_PART2.....TS_PART 6.
The default tablespace of the schema is TS_PROD.
The table had following structure previously:
create table ORDER_BOOK
CUST_ID NUMBER(10),
PROFILE_ID NUMBER(10),
PRODUCT_ID NUMBER(10),
SUB_PROFILE_ID VARCHAR2(25),
CASHFLOW_DATE DATE,
EARNINGS NUMBER(24,6),
constraint ORDER_BOOK_PK primary key(CUST_ID,PROFILE_ID,PRODUCT_ID,SUB_PROFILE_ID,CASHFLOW_DATE)
partition by range (CASHFLOW_DATE)
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART1 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2003', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART1,
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART2 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2006', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART2,
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART3 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2009', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART3,
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART4 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2012', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART4,
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART5 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2015', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART5,
partition ORDER_BOOK_PART6 values less than (TO_DATE('01-01-2018', 'DD-MM-YYYY')) tablespace TS_PART6
create index ORDER_BOOK_IDX on ORDER_BOOK(PRODUCT_ID,CASHFLOW_DATE);
Now I did the following steps to change the previously existing partitions to the new range-hash composite partitions:
begin
dbms_redefinition.can_redef_table
(uname=>'DEMO_TEST',
tname=>'ORDER_BOOK',
options_flag=>DBMS_REDEFINITION.CONS_USE_PK);
end;
create table INTERIM_ORDER_BOOK
CUST_ID NUMBER(10),
PROFILE_ID NUMBER(10),
PRODUCT_ID NUMBER(10),
SUB_PROFILE_ID VARCHAR2(25),
CASHFLOW_DATE DATE,
EARNINGS NUMBER(24,6),
constraint INTERIM_ORDER_BOOK_PK primary key(CUST_ID,PROFILE_ID,PRODUCT_ID,SUB_PROFILE_ID,CASHFLOW_DATE)
partition by range(CASHFLOW_DATE)
subpartition by hash (CUST_ID)
subpartition template
subpartition SP1 tablespace TS_PART1,
subpartition SP2 tablespace TS_PART2,
subpartition SP3 tablespace TS_PART3,
subpartition SP4 tablespace TS_PART4,
subpartition SP5 tablespace TS_PART5,
subpartition SP6 tablespace TS_PART6
(partition P1 values less than (to_date('01-01-2003','DD-MM-YYYY')),
partition P2 values less than (to_date('01-01-2006','DD-MM-YYYY')),
partition P3 values less than (to_date('01-01-2009','DD-MM-YYYY')),
partition P4 values less than (to_date('01-01-2012','DD-MM-YYYY')),
partition P5 values less than (to_date('01-01-2015','DD-MM-YYYY')),
partition P6 values less than (to_date('01-01-2018','DD-MM-YYYY')))
enable row movement;
begin
dbms_redifinition.start_redef_table
(uname=>'DEMO_TEST',
orig_table=>'ORDER_BOOK',
int_table=>'INTERIM_ORDER_BOOK',
options_flag=>DBMS_REDEFINITION.CONS_USE_PK);
end;
begin
dbms_redefinition.finish_redef_table
(uname=>'DEMO_TEST',
orig_table=>'ORDER_BOOK',
int_table=>'INTERIM_ORDER_BOOK');
end;
After that I made the index with LOCAL clause i.e local index.
But the problem is that...initially when there is only range partitioning, then the datas are going to the corresponding partition tablespaces.
But after modifying the table, populating the table results in consumption of space in both partition tablespaces as well as the default tablespace.
I have checked the size of the tablespaces. From that I came to know about this.
The output of the USER_TAB_SUBPARTITIONS is okk...every subpartitions are in the corresponding tablespaces.
But the main partitions (USER_TAB_PARTITION) are in the default tablespace.
please help me....thanks in advance...
Edited by: user12780416 on Apr 13, 2012 7:46 AM

Answer 1

user12780416 wrote:
Thanks sir for your reply...
Yes, by MOVE syntax I can move the partitions in the corresponding tablespaces.
But i am not getting the reason of consumption of both the tablespaces.
The TS_PART1 increased 2MB, TS_PART2 increased 6MB, TS_PART3 increased 2MB, TS_PART4 increased 5MB, TS_PART5 increased 9MB.
and TS_PROD increased (2+6+2+5+9)=24MB
Why is this happening ?
I have read that when we make subpartitions, they main partitions are the logical entity only and the subpartitions are the physical entity.Where have you read this?
As RP rightly pointed out, you can specify a tablespace for each partition (each partition using a different tablespace) and a tablespace for each subpartitions (again, using many if you felt like it).