> Thanks again for the reply.  So it sounds like the answer to my original
> question is that it's expected that the pseudo-partitioning would introduce
> a fairly significant amount of overhead.  Correct?

Correct.   For that matter, Oracle table partitioning introduces significant 
overhead, from what I've seen.  I don't think there's a way not to.

Generally, I counsel people that they only want to consider 
pseudo-partitioning if they have one axis on the table which is used in 90% 
or more of the queries against that table.

What would improve the situation significantly, and the utility of 
pseudo-partitioning, is the ability to have a single index span multiple 
partitions.   This would allow you to have a segmented index for the 
partitioned axis, yet still use an unsegmented index for the other columns.  
However, there's a *lot* of work to do to make that happen.


Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to