Agreed that scanning one big index is faster than many partitions. Then raises the questions - I thought partitioning is for:
1) ease of archiving/dropping off old partitions - drop old and create new partitions in a sliding window. A single large global index negates a lot of this ease - even though it is true that deletes on non-partitioned tables would be even more inconvenient. 2) efficiencies in partition pruning for queries. If you are "querying whole table" - why bother with partitioning? The point then becomes you don't need to partition in the first place, or your partitioning scheme is not appropriate? > When partitioning key is not a part of the index and you are querying whole table, then it is faster to scan one big index than many smaller ones. The difference is something like log rows to partcount*log (rows/partcount). > > > BTW, local indexes are the only way to go -- I've never > > understood the point > > of global indexes on partitioned tables -- maybe someone else can? -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: Binley Lim INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
