Re: Partitioning - logicall transparent?
From: Greg Linwood (g_linwoodQhotmail.com)
Date: 08/16/04
- Next message: flologic: "sql server service account"
- Previous message: Uri Dimant: "Re: sysprocesses - sp_who"
- In reply to: Andy Black: "Partitioning - logicall transparent?"
- Next in thread: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Partitioning - logicall transparent?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:43:40 +1000
Hi Andy
SQL 2000 cannot partition a table directly - it uses an alternative approach
based on views. It is generally transparent to applications except where the
table being partitioned was using an identity (sequence).
You can read more on partitioned views here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/createdb/cm_8_des_06_17zr.asp
SQL Server 2005 includes direct table partitioning, although it's only in
Beta at this stage. It's partitioning support includes range which should
support your date ranges, but not hashlist or composite partitioning.
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Andy Black" <Andy Black@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D34620B3-5E0D-4AFB-B810-5AA2F70A0A47@microsoft.com...
> In Oracle we have implemented database table partitioning for a table
> exceeding 130 million rows, to alleviate maintenance issues (update stats,
> back up etc). The partitions are by date such that after a month a new
table
> partition is created and inserts commence on the new partition. In this
way
> we can update stats on the last partition as required, the older
partitions
> being effectively static do not need further maintenance. All of this is
> transparent to the application the database is supporting, we have also
seen
> good improvements in query performance.
>
> Is there a way to do this for SQL 2000? Would it be transparent to the
> application the database is supporting?
>
> I would expect this table in a particular implementation to exceed 400
> million rows per year once in production!
- Next message: flologic: "sql server service account"
- Previous message: Uri Dimant: "Re: sysprocesses - sp_who"
- In reply to: Andy Black: "Partitioning - logicall transparent?"
- Next in thread: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Partitioning - logicall transparent?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
