What is table partition?

HI,
What is meant for table partition?
-Arun.M.D

Hi Arun ,
You use partitioning to split the total dataset for an InfoProvider into several, smaller, physically independent and redundancy-free units. This separation improves system performance when you analyze data delete data from the InfoProvider.The basic idea behind database partitioning is to split a physical table and its indexes into several smaller physical tables and indexes.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/33/dc2038aa3bcd23e10000009b38f8cf/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/e0/b60b404b2b1e07e10000000a1550b0/content.htm
Regards,
®

Similar Messages

What Oracle Table contains Partition Key Field Name?

What Oracle table/view maintains the partition key field name?
All_Tab_Partitions does not appear to maintain such information.
When I use Toad -> Schema -> Tables -> Partitions, it lists the partition key field name that the partition is based.
Thank You

all_part_key_columns
or
USER_part_key_columns
Edited by: OrionNet on Dec 5, 2008 3:56 PM

What is the best way to dynamically create table partition by year and month based on a date column?

Hi,
I have a huge table and it will keep growing. I have a date column in this table and thought of partition the table by year and month. Can any you suggest better approach so that partition will create automatically for new data also along with the existing
data? Nothing but automatically/dynamically partition should create along with file group and partition files.
Thanks in advance!
Palash

Also this one
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/dang/archive/2008/08/30/Sliding-Window-Table-Partitioning.aspx
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

Getting error while importing a table partition

Hi,
I am trying to import a table partition from OEM and occurred with following error:
Job IMPORT000042 has been reopened at Friday, 13 June, 2008 14:44
Restarting "SYSMAN"."IMPORT000042":
Processing object type TABLE_EXPORT/TABLE/TBL_TABLE_DATA/TABLE/TABLE_DATA
ORA-31693: Table data object "SCOTT"."CONTAINER":"PARTITION_5" failed to load/unload and is being skipped due to error:
ORA-06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error
LPX-00210: expected '<' instead of 'n'
Job "SYSMAN"."IMPORT000042" completed with 1 error(s) at 14:44
Job state: COMPLETED
Thanks

What's the source and target database Oracle version?
What's the character set of both databases?

Index Vs table partition

I have table whose growth is 1 million per month and may increase in future. I currently place an index on column which is frequently uses in where clause. there is another column which contains months so it may possible that I make 12 partitions of that. I want to know what is suitable. is there any connection between index and table partition?
Message was edited by:
user459835

I think the question is more of what type of queries are answered by this table?
is it that most of the times the results returned span across several months?
is there any relation to the column you use in where clause with the data belonging to a particular month (or range there-of)?

What type of partition should I use? Range or Hash or ..?

Hi,
I am on Oracle 8.1.7.4 .
I have a table with 10 million rows and looks like its a good candidate for partitioning.
There is a varchar2 column and the data is evenly distributed on the string value. If I want to partition the table on that string value what type of partitioning can I use. How can I give the range, if I use range partition, on the string value ?
Can/Should I use hash partitioning?
I know that there is a list partitioning in O9i, but I am on 8i.
Please help.
Regards

<quote>
I have a table with 10 million rows and looks like its a good candidate for partitioning.
</quote>
Table volume, in itself, is not enough to warrant partitioning â¦ hope you have some other reasons.
<quote>
â¦ but would like to partition the table on the mentioned varchar2 column, so that queries would be efficiant.
</quote>
Since you donât mention the actual query or class of queries, maybe it is worth mentioning that partitioning could speed up some queries but also can slow down a lot more other queries.
<quote>
So, how can i re-create the table partitioned on a varchar2 column
</quote>
No different than numbers or dates?
create table tp
( str   varchar2(10) not null
,fill char(20)      not null
partition by range(str)
( partition p1 values less than ('F')
,partition p2 values less than ('L')
,partition p3 values less than ('R')
,partition p4 values less than (maxvalue)
insert into tp
select substr(object_name,1,10), lpad('x',20,'x')
from user_objects
flip@FLOP> select * from tp partition (p2);
STR        FILL
F1         xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
GENERATE_R xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
IPSDEV.US. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxThe link to Tomâs article is fine â¦ it just happens to be one of the few threads heâs not mentioning that partitioning is not the magic fast=true mechanism â¦ look for some other articles on partitioning and youâll quickly discover his views on this subject.
There may be a case for partitioning â¦ but you havenât presented any reasonable justification for it â¦ so, why bother?

Long running table partitioning job

Dear HANA grus,
I've just finished table partitioning jobs for CDPOS(change document item) with 4 partitions by hash with 3 columns.
Total data volumn is around 340GB and the table size was 32GB !!!!!
(migration job was done without disabling CD, so currently deleting data on the table with RSCDOK99)
Before partitioning, the data volumn of the table was around 32GB.
After partitioning, the size has changed to 25GB.
It took around One and half hour with exclusive lock as mentioned in the HANA adminitration guide.
(It is QA DB, so less complaints)
I thought that I might not can do this in the production DB.
Does anyone hava any idea for accelerating this task?? (This is the fastest DBMS HANA!!!!)
Or Do you have any plan for online table partitioning functionality??(To HANA Development team)
Any comments would be appreciate.
Cheers,
- Jason

Jason,
looks like we're cross talking here...
What was your rationale to partition the table in the first place?
       => To reduce deleting time of CDPOS            (As I mentioned it was almost 10% quantity of whole Data volume, So I would like to save deleting time of the table from any pros of partitioning table like partitioning pruning)
Ok, I see where you're coming from, but did you ever try out if your idea would actually work?
As deletion of data is heavily related with locating the records to be deleted, creating an index would have probably be the better choice.
Thinking about it... you want to get rid of 10% of your data and in order to speed the overall process up, you decide to move 100% of the data into sets of 25% of the data - equally holding their 25% share of the 10% records to be deleted.
The deletion then should run along these 4 sets of 25% of data.
It's surely me, but where is the speedup potential here?
How many unloads happened during the re-partitioning?
       => It was fully uploaded in the memory before partitioning the table by myself.(from HANA studio)
I was actually asking about unloads _during_ the re-partitioning process. Check M_CS_UNLOADS for the time frame in question.
How do the now longer running SQL statements look like?
       => As i mentioned selecting/deleting increased almost twice.
That's not what I asked.
Post the SQL statement text that was taking longer.
What are the three columns you picked for partitioning?
       => mandant, objectclas, tabname(QA has 2 clients and each of them have nearly same rows of the table)
Why those? Because these are the primary key?
I wouldn't be surprised if the SQL statements only refer to e.g. MANDT and TABNAME in the WHERE clause.
In that case the partition pruning cannot work and all partitions have to be searched.
How did you come up with 4 partitions? Why not 13, 72 or 213?
       => I thought each partitions' size would be 8GB(32GB/4) if they are divided into same size(just simple thought), and 8GB size is almost same size like other largest top20 tables in the HANA DB.
Alright, so basically that was arbitrary.
For the last comment of your reply, most people would do partition for their existing large tables to get any benefit of partitioning(just like me). I think your comment can be applied for the newly inserting data.
Well, not sure what "most people" would do.
HASH partitioning a large existing table certainly is not an activity that is just triggered off in a production system. Adding partitions to a range partitions table however happens all the time.
- Lars

Table Partitioning in Oracle 9i

Hi all,
I have a question on partitioning in Oracle 9i.
I have a parent table with primary key A1 and attribute A2. A2 is not a primary key but I would to create partition for the table based on this attribute. I have a child table with attribute B1 being a foreign key to A1.
I wish to perform a data purging on the parent and child table. I'll purge the parent table based on A2, but for the child table, it will be inefficient if I delete all records in child table where parent.A1 = child.B1. Should I add a new attribute A2 to the child table, partition the child table based on this attribute or is there a better way to do it?
Thanks in advance for all replies.
Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard
Right 100K in the parent...but how many in the child ?
I guess it comes back to what I said earlier...you can either take the hit on the cascaded delete to get out the records on the child table or you can denormalise the column down onto the child table in order to partition by it.
I'm building a Data Warehouse currently and we're using the denormalise approach on a couple of tables in order to allow them to be equipartitioned and enable easier partition management and DML operations as you've indicated....but our tables have 100's of millions of rows in them so we really need to do that for manageability.
100K records in the parent - provided the ratio to the child is not such that on average each deleted parent has 100's of children is probably not too onerous, especially for a monthly batch process - the question there would be how much time do you have to do this at the end of the month ? I'd probably suggest you set up a quick test and benchmark it with say 10K records as a representative sample (can do all 100K if you have time/space) - then assess that load/time against your month end window....if its reasonably quick then no need to compromise your design.
You should also consider whether the 100K is going to remain consistent over time or is it going to grow rapidly in which that would sway you towards adding the denormalisation for partitioning approach at the outset.
HTH
Jeff

Reg. table partition

Hi
Shall anyone explain about table partition.
What it is and when it can be used.
regards
Sridhar
[email protected]

Hi,
Partitioning is nothing but u can split up the whoe dataset of an Info cube into smaller, physically independant and redundancy free units. Because of this Query performance has increased while reporting, also when u r deleting data from the info cube.
We can Partition the ODS/Cube based on 0CALMONTH/0FISCYEAR.
Double click on ur ODS/Cube.
Extras > Partitioning.
This is called Physical partitioning.we go fro this partition prior loading data into the info provdider..
You can even do that after the load, but you have to move the data.
There is another Partitioning also LOGICAL PARTITIONING.
Ex: If we have 2 maintain 3 years of Data.
We will maintain 2005 data in a cube, 2006 data in a cube and 2007 data in cube.
Different cube for different years....we will group these Cubes under a Multi Provider.
Check the following link regarding partitioning:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/0a/cd6e3a30aac013e10000000a114084/frameset.htm
Partitioning

Introduction of Oracle Table Partitions into PeopleSoft HRMS environment

I would like to pose a general question and see if anyone has found any published advice / suggestions from PeopleSoft or Oracle on this. I believe that Oracle table partitioning isn't supported through the PeopleTools application designer functionality. Most likely this is done for platform independence. However, we were thinking about implementing table partitioning for performance and the ability to refresh test instances with subsets worth of data instead of the entire database.
I know that this would be a substantial effort, but was wondering if anyone had any documentation on this type of implemention. I've read some articles from David Kurtz on the subject, and it sounds like these were all custom jobs for each individual client. Was looking for something more generic on this practice from PeopleSoft or Oracle...
Regards,
Jay

Thanks for the article Nicolas. I will add that to my collection, good reference piece.
I think you gasped the gist of the query, which was I know that putting partitioning into a PeopleSoft application is going to be highly specific to the client and application that you are running. But what I looking for was something like a baseline guide for implementing partitioning in a PeopleSoft application as a whole.
In other words, something like notifiaction that the application designer panels would be affected since they don't have the ability to manage partitions. Therefore, any changes to tables that would utilize partitioning would need to be maintained at the database level and no longer utilize the DDL generated from PeopleTools Application Designer. Other consideration would be, like maybe a list of tables that would be candidates for partitioning based on the application, in my case HRMS. And maybe, suggestions on what column should be used for partitioning, etc...All of which are touched on in your identified article about putting partitioning in at the database level for a generic application.
Thanks for your help, it is much appreciated...
Jay

Vertical table partition?

Hi,
our database contains XML documents in 11 languages, one table for each language. Besides, there is meta information about each document which is the same for each language. Therefore, this meta information has been placed in a separate table.
Now to the problem: common database queries search in the documents (Intermedia) as well
in the meta data, what means that there is a join between the table that contains the documents (columns: key, documenttext) and the table that contains the meta information (columns: key and 18 others). Unfortunately after having located documents via Intermedia index, Oracle reads the corresponding data blocks for extracting the key. Because the documents are up to 4K, Oracle reads much information that it does not need. Is it possible to have a vertical partition of the documents table in order to be able to efficiently read only the key information instead of the whole table rows?
Thank You for any hint,
Markus

Thanks For your comment and sorry for delay my Internet got down yesterday. Well, As you said throw away existing table structure.. i agree with you but there is a limitation right now. Our application only understand the current structure. Any change in database result to change execution engine. Actually, Our application provide interface to do Ad hoc reporting. we certainly use dimensional modeling but unfortunately our CTO believe existing structure is much better than the dimensional model. it gives the flexibility to load any data like retail, click stream etc and provide reporting on data. Although, the architecture is bad but they we providing analytic to customer....
To cut the long story short, they have assigned me a task to improve its performance. i have already improve it performance by using different feature of oracle like table partitioning sub partitioning, indexing and many more... but we want more... i have observed during the data loading process the Update part took much time. if i could do this any other way it would reduced the overall data loading time.. we extract the file from client server and perform transformation according to business rule and out the result of transformation file in flat file.. finally our application use sql loader to load in flat table then divide it in different table. Some of our existing client have 250 column some are 350 plus...
i think i have explained much but if you have more question on it i will ready to answer them. Please suggest with your experience how could i improve performance of existing system.

Oracle Tables Partitioning

I am planning for table partitioning of existing tables...
database is production 10gR1 i need it to upgrade to 11gR2 and also implement table partitioning. what should be the best way to do so with minimum downtime and zero data loss. Please advice. size of the tables are 20 to 40GB.. source database is in solaris and planning to migrate on linux.

my question is for partitioning with minimum downtime with zero data loss.
the scenario is like
I took a export of source table and create a new partitioned table with different name, then import the data into new table, drop the source table and rename the new partitioned table with the source tables's name. Its all fine because there will be very minimum downtime but here we will loss some data. It is because the transactions which are done in the mean time will not be in the exported file. Is there any way another..? I hope you got my question.

Benefits of table partitioning on ASM controlled storage?

Hi everyone,
I understand that, as the documentation describes, table partitioning for the purpose of striping is a very good strategy for high performing OLTP databases. So you can explicitly assign partitions to different database-files, residing on different disks. A pretty clear benefit.
What about ASM controlled storage? Does it help partitioning your tables here, for the purpose of striping? Or is it even better to abandon the ASM option for the sake of reliable striping benefit?
Thanks in advance for any helpful thought or real life report...

My situation is the following:
I am a database developer/architect. In my organisation we have a DBA team, which has no knowledge of the application.
So, I am not in a position to test. I am supposed to order/require this or that from our DBA, in this case ASM or NO ASM. Partitioning of tables is my job.
That's why I am asking if anybody else has experience with this.
To our app: our challenge - when we go into production - will not be the mass of data, but the concurrent use of it from up-to 10.000 users. This is why I am considering a partitioning solution, suitable to the usage profile.
So does anybody have experience from similar scenarios? Is it possible to trace, what ASM actually does, e.g. does it stripe the tables across the drives optimally?

Please advice about table partitioning

Hi.
I need some advice on table partitioning. Here is the problem : My application procesess 7 types of documents (all like invoices). I have created master/detail tables for each type of document. But the are no big difrences between documents, so I was planing to move all of this document types to one master and one detail table and use table partitioning based od document type. This would to simplifay my programming very much... but I am not sure how will this effect on application performance ??? We process a large number of documents (over 300 a day).
So what do you think ?

1) If you are using the standard edition, partitioning is not an option. Partitioning is an extra-cost licensing option that is only available to enterprise edition customers.
2) I am having a bit of difficulty reconciling the numbers you are providing with your descriptions. An application that inserts 5 MB of data a day and adds fewer than 2 million rows per year is a pretty small database, particularly to consider partitioning for. 50 active users doesn't seem terribly large. It is far from obvious to me that separate schemas by year provides any sort of benefit overall. OLTP operations should be able to use appropriate indexes to avoid all the read-only data. And a single schema with a single set of tables minimizes the number of hard parses you have to do, the number of queries that have to be rewritten every year to go after new schemas of data, etc
Justin

How to delete table partitions

Hi all,
I want to know how can I delete table partitions.I have partitioned table in schema A owned by user A.But I created table partitions in Schema B owned by user B..Now I want the partions from schema B,it says table doesn't exist and when I tried to delete the partitions from schema A ,it says partition doesn't exist,What to do ?
Regards,
AA.

can you give the statements you tried (and as which user)?
I couldn't follow your actions, sorry.
Martin

What is table partition?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for