Re: How to handle secondary keys in partitioning?
A couple of follow on questions for Mattias:
For a non-Partition table, "where sender_id=1 ordered by date" together with "INDEX(sender_id, date)" will (I think) avoid a filesort. Seems like in a Partitioned table, each partition could deliver the rows in order, and then the priority queue could put them together. Or is that asking for more smarts than is in Partitioning today? (I note that you said "and there will be an additional sorting cost".)
"the cost for index writes should be lower for partitioned tables, since the b-tree depth is lower per partition than it would be for a non partitioned table" -- isn't that offset by the effort to figure out which Partition to reach into?
Subject
Views
Written By
Posted
4797
May 04, 2010 12:46AM
2632
May 04, 2010 01:29PM
2289
May 04, 2010 04:30PM
2470
May 05, 2010 02:20AM
Re: How to handle secondary keys in partitioning?
2317
May 06, 2010 12:04AM
2719
May 06, 2010 03:23PM
2386
May 06, 2010 10:50PM
2346
May 07, 2010 02:38AM
2304
May 08, 2010 05:31PM
2357
May 09, 2010 04:37AM
2214
May 09, 2010 12:41PM
2191
May 09, 2010 01:23PM
2298
May 12, 2010 05:29AM
2736
May 06, 2010 12:34AM
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.
Content reproduced on this site is the property of the respective copyright holders.
It is not reviewed in advance by Oracle and does not necessarily represent the opinion
of Oracle or any other party.