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
4140
May 04, 2010 12:46AM
2345
May 04, 2010 01:29PM
1984
May 04, 2010 04:30PM
2184
May 05, 2010 02:20AM
Re: How to handle secondary keys in partitioning?
2045
May 06, 2010 12:04AM
2442
May 06, 2010 03:23PM
2085
May 06, 2010 10:50PM
2061
May 07, 2010 02:38AM
2018
May 08, 2010 05:31PM
2076
May 09, 2010 04:37AM
1954
May 09, 2010 12:41PM
1924
May 09, 2010 01:23PM
2026
May 12, 2010 05:29AM
2480
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.