Sql Server 2005 Partitioning Problem
Jul 19, 2006i'm using sql server 2005 partitioning feature, when i update a record in 100 record partition it takes the same time as 1000000 records partition why, could any one help
View 1 Repliesi'm using sql server 2005 partitioning feature, when i update a record in 100 record partition it takes the same time as 1000000 records partition why, could any one help
View 1 RepliesAnanth writes "A new feature is established in SQL Server 2005. That is Partitioned Table. I went through several articles in net regarding partioned table. But I did not get any generalized version of Partitioning.
For example I partitioned a table into 4 Filegroups based on Transaction Date. So I used range function to give ranges for 4 quarters of one year. It works fine. But I would like to generalize this scenario. It will work for one year. If new year comes ,I have to write new script and execute the same.
The Partitioned function should work for 12 months in a given year. So here year is the paramter and then that function should be construct based on the year automatically.
Can anybody give me answer asap."
Once I've added Files for a database across mulitple SAN drives willSQL 2005 automatically partition data across the Files automatically?Will it atleast grow across files automatically? Or do I have to doScheme Functions, Partitions, and assign the Scheme Partition to eachtable in the database?ThanksErik
View 1 Replies View RelatedI want to know how to partition a table using two columns (Example: Salesman, OrderDate).
View 8 Replies View RelatedWe currently want to move towards partitioning tables on a master server which is running SQL 2005 Enterprise Edition. However, we have transactional replication as well as log-shipping set-up against that server. The log-ship destination is also running Enterprise Edition, but the subscription server(s) are all Standard Edition only. Will there be any problems or special steps required in creating data partitions on some of these replicated tables if we don't upgrade our license?
View 1 Replies View RelatedNormally it is recommended to leave an empty partition on both the front and back ends of a table to avoid data movement when merging/splitting. But I have some questions based on my scenario, which is a table partitioned by a load date, so all records in a partition contain the same date, not a range of dates.
If I use range left, once I switch out the first partition it would become empty, so would there be data movement when I merge it into the next partition? The real issue though is that we will not just be removing the first partition, but "random" partitions throughout the table. Will this work?
If I use range right, when I split the last partition to create a new one it doesn't seem there would be any data movement there either. Am I missing something?
Basically I'm wondering if I should use range left or right. Most recommend using right, but then the boundary value is not the value in the partition. This could potentially result in someone deleting the wrong data if they are not careful. So is there any reason not to use left in my scenario?
I did a test of removing a partition in the middle and it worked just fine; this was using range right. I have about 6 million rows per partition. I also tested splitting at the end and it worked fine. I'll rebuild it with range left and test.
Is there any benefit in creating seperate file groups for a partitionedtable on a multi-processor server with RAID5 and 1 Logical Drive?
View 8 Replies View RelatedI was wondering if Microsoft SQL Server support any partitioning method (like range, list, hash or composite partitioning in Oracle) or you have to partition all tables manually?
Thanks in advance,
Bracia
I need Dynamic Partition of SQL Table.
1. What is the best practice for partitioning (on date column)
2. The project on which i am working correctly have a case where in i get the update of my status flag after few days (Say 15 - 30) in that case if my data got into partition table how to update and how to search which partition has my data
3. Is creating partition occupies more disk space?
4. Is every partition would need index?
I've yet to use partitioning in a production environment, and pretty much last ran any partitioning related code a few years back when looking at certification; so I'm definitely not an expert on the matter and only loosely clued up on the concepts.
I've recently started with a new employer, and they have just implemented a new system for sms messaging. The database tables tracking the sms messages being sent are going to get big and so they have created decided to implement partitioning on some of the tables using a partition scheme on the CreatedDate column; the DBA involved in designing the partitioning has left and I'm picking this up.
The relevant DDL for the table is below:-
CREATE TABLE [Message].[Sms](
[SmsId] [bigint] IDENTITY(250000001,1) NOT NULL,
[CreatedDate] [datetime] NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [DF_Sms:CreatedDate] DEFAULT (getdate()),
CONSTRAINT [PK_Sms:SmsId] PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED
[code]....
There are some issues with the above that I will be addressing seperately (e.g. the clustered index should be unique as it contians the unique key, and the fillfactors are daft), but my concerns for this post are below.
1) How to define the Primary Key and enforce it's uniqueness whilst trying to ensure it's aligned with the partition in order to be able to switch out old data once an as yet undefined retention period has passed. In books online it states:- "If it is not possible for the partitioning column to be included in the unique key, you must use a DML trigger instead to enforce uniqueness. " Books online - Special Guidelines for Partitioned Indexes. However, I'm not sure what this means, nor how I create the primary key to use the partition function seeing as it doesn't have the CreatedDate in the unique key?
2) The original partition function was envisaged as the following:-
CREATE PARTITION FUNCTION [DateFunction](datetime) AS RANGE
LEFT FOR VALUES (N'2014-01-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2014-04-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2014-07-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2014-10-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-01-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-04-01T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-04-02T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-04-03T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-04-04T00:00:00.000'
, N'2015-04-05T00:00:00.000')
GO
There is a procedure that has been created and scheduled daily that will create a new partition for each day, and then merge these together at the end of the quarter. My understanding of partitioning is that this is a bad idea, as it will result in merging several populated partitions together. Is my understanding correct? If so, I'm planning on removing the day partitions at the end of the function, and simply adding quarterly partitions, maintaining a spare empty partition at the end of the table. Would this make more sense?
Script to do the table partitioning for a 500gb in sliding window technique?
View 9 Replies View Relatedwe planning to create partitioning on existing tables. The partitioning is on date column, there should be one partition for each year.
Creating of new partitions should be automated, and also we dont have any plans of archiving old data, all we want is that new partition creation should be automated.
I have 6 tables which are very huge in row count and need to be partitioned for better manageability.
Little info: Every day, 300 Million records are inserted and 300 million records are deleted in below 7 tables. we maintain only 8 days worth of data in below tables which is the reason records which are older than 8 days are continuously deleted.
Master table which has [ID],[Timestamp]
Table Name: Sample - 2,578,106
Child tables: Foreign key [ID] is common for all the tables. There is no timestamp column in child table.
dbo.ConnectionDB - 1,147,578,048
dbo.ConnectionSS - 876,458,321
dbo.ConnectionRT - 118,133,857
dbo.ConnectionSample - 100,038,535
dbo.Command - 100,032,235
I would like to partition the above child tables based on the IDs that are inserted every 4 hours. Meaning, All IDs that are inserted in 4 hours window should be in a partition.
We have a database and have 6-7 growing tables. All the tables have Primary and foreign key relation. I want to do partition based on the date column.
I need 3 partitions
First partition has to hold present data
second partition need to hold the previous year data (SAS storage)
Third partition need to hold all the old data and need to be in the archive database
I understand that first we need to disable the constraints (Indexes PK & FK)
Then create partition function and partition schema
Then Create the Constraints again
We have an existing BI/DW process that adds large chunks of data daily (~10M rows) to an existing table, as well as using Deletes to remove stale data. This scenario seems to beg for partitioning to support switching in/out data.
After lots of reading on this, I have figured out the mechanics of the switching, bit I still have some unknowns about the indexes needed to support this.
The table currently has several non-clustered indexes, including one on the partitioning column - let's call that column snapshotdate. Fortunately there are no FKs involved, and no constraints.
Most of the partitioning material I see focuses on creating a clustered PK to assist with switching. Not sure if this is actually necessary, but assume I create one using an Identity column (currently missing) plus snapshotdate.
For the other non-clustered, non-unique indexes, can I just add the snapshotdate to the end of the index? i.e. will that satisfy the switching requirement?
Hello
I have a table containing 100,000 record for each year, and every year a new 100,000 record are inserted,I need to know how to make partion this table by year
I need to know the syntax
Thank you
I have begun my quest to become familiar with SQL 2000 table partitioning and have had some success.
I've partitioned tables according to the "rules" and guidlines of other papers and the show plans look good for all cases.
But when I went to create another demo series, I got stuck.
I've created two tables, with the appropriate CHECK constraints, and with a "union all" view.
When inserting data, it goes to the right tables.
When reading data with a where clause like:
col1=10,
the show plan shows the query getting the data from the ONE correct table.
BUT
When the where clause looks like:
where col1 between 1 and 10:
the showplan shows the query getting data from both tables, instead of the table that 1 to 10 belongs to.
Help!
Hi guys,
1) I'm about to implement SQL Table/Index Partitioning for the first time. It seems really good, no downside. Is there an "Gotcha's" I gotta be weary of?
2) My tests show a clear performance gain. Is there a performance loss in other areas?
In "Designing Partitions to Improve Query Performance" it says this:
"In this way, the SQL Server query optimizer can process the join faster, because the partitions themselves can be joined. If a query joins two tables that are not collocated or are not partitioned on the join field, the presence of partitions may actually slow down query processing instead of accelerate it."
What does that mean?
If I have:
Select A.Col1, B.Col3
from A
join B on A.Col5=B.Col6
Does that mean I have to partition A.Col5 & B.Col6 the same way else my queries will get slower?
3) Does it take up more space? Do restores take longer?
4) How much maintenance is involved?
Is there a way of automating the creation of new partitions? Or do you just create loads that you'll need in the future e.g. always have a few months' partition created ahead of time?
The "Designing Partitions to Manage Subsets of Data" article in BOL seems to indicate some manual work every month (if you have a monthly partitioning strategy).
5) Why not partition every table that has over say a million rows?
6) If I create a Yearly Partition on a table that has been around for a long time, will it automatically partition all the indexes on that table? Or do you have to re-create the indexes for that to happen?
7) Neither table can have a full-text index in a partition move. Does that mean you can't ever partition tables with full-text indexes?
8) Partitioning doesn't seem to fit well with replication. Do you have to end up choosing between the two?
i have a table named "user" in which user which are located at different places within a city are recorded.
i want to group user with respect to there location like users of northern region are recorded first then users of western region and so on.
tell me from horizontal and vertical partitioning wh technique is better or i should use some other technique.
thanks for ur consideration.
Hello all. My company's in the process of configuring our new Dell server boxes. We're contemplating whether to partition the drive (where DB will reside) into 1 large partition or several smaller partitions.
What are the pros and cons of each option? Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
Hi,
I want to know more on table partitioning.I do not know where to get the right info.from.
I have a doubt - if a table is partitioned horizontally how does a query identifies where to pick up the data from i.e. from which part of partitioned table?
I'm faced with a project that requires the caching of vacations.
Each vacation has a departure date & a price.
The amount of different vacations that will need to be cached is probably near 1 million per day.
I will then need to select the price(s) of vacations for either a single day or a date range (based on the vacation criteria).
I was considering creating a new partition (table with a date on it) every day.
This would allow me to jump into the needed table(s) based on the vacation search criteria. This would also allow me to drop tables with past dates.
I was considering running this all on 1 sql server. I was hoping I could create multiple threads for a datespan search and hit all the tables in the daterange at the same time.
Can you guys enlighten the noob on where I really need some help on this?
Hi,
I am trying to implement partitioning on a table
depending upon the fiscal_month value...
The current values are from 1-6...
Create partition function LoadDataPartitionFunction ( smallint)
as
Range for values (1,2,3,4,5,6)
-- drop partition scheme LoadDataPartitionScheme
create partition scheme LoadDataPartitionScheme
as
Partition LoadDataPartitionFunction ALL to ([PRIMARY])
CREATE TABLE Load_Data_Partition (
[RowID] [int] NOT NULL,
[Fiscal_Month] [smallint] NOT NULL,
[Fiscal_Year] [smallint] NOT NULL,
....
[Service] [nvarchar](100) COLLATE
) ON LoadDataPartitionScheme (Fiscal_Month)
truncate table Load_Data_old --- same schema as load_data_partition
Alter table load_data_partition switch partition 1 to Load_Data_old
-- which month's data to be moved out
alter partition function LoadDataPartitionFunction () merge range (1)
Alter partition scheme LoadDataPartitionScheme next used [primary]
-- which months data to be moved in
alter partition function LoadDataPartitionFunction () split range(7)
Select * from sys.partition_range_values
function_id boundary_id parameter_id value
----------- ----------- ------------ -----
65545 1 1 2
65545 2 1 3
65545 3 1 4
65545 4 1 5
65545 5 1 6
65545 6 1 7
Alter table [Load_Data_new] switch to [Load_Data_partition] partition 6
ALTER TABLE SWITCH statement failed. Check constraints of source table Load_Data_new' allow values that are not allowed by range defined by partition 6 on target table 'Load_Data_partition'.
Values in Load_Data_new for fiscal_month is 7
But when i try
Insert into [Load_Data_partition]
Select * from [Load_Data_new]
where fiscal_month = 7
it works fine...
reference used : http://www.sqlskills.com/resources/Whitepapers/Partitioning%20in%20SQL%20Server%202005%20Beta%20I I.htm
hi all,
before i had a big database more than 90GB and it's growing very sharp so what i did is to create a summary database that gonna hold some aggregation and i create also three tables that gonna hold the data, on will hold the data for the last three months (very detailed information) one between 3 months and a year(less detailed) and the last one older than a year(less less detailed) these are the company requirement i'm working with.
then i transfer the data to the new tables with stored procedures.
now my question is: do i need to create a view for these three tables? and if yes how should i do it?!! cus i do not have the same columns in the three tables.
thanks experts.
i want to partition a table containing about 3 million rows. The partition column will be of datetime type.
following is the partition function i have used
create partition function MyPartFun
(datetime) as range left for values ('07/30/2007','09/30/2007','11/30/2007','01/30/2008','04/30/2008')
following is the partition scheme i have used
create partition scheme PartScheme as
partition MyPartFun all to ([primary])
i know how to add partition column while creating the table
But dont know how to add above partition scheme to an already populated table
Plz help...
Snehalata writes "does view for vertical partitioning improves the performance, since the view will have all the columns which exist in the original table(without partitioning?"
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi,
I have a database created using Enterprise Manager Wizard.
For example datafile db1_data.mdf and log file db1_log file exists.
All the tables are created in datafile db1_data.mdf.
Now to improve performance I want to implement table partitioning.
Can anybody tell me howto implement it with existing strutcure.
Suppose there is table Mytable in which all update and delete actions are performed regularly.And it contains about 10,0000 records.
I want to partition the table so that it contains 5000 records.
Solution with example highly appreciated.
Satish
How to partition tables in dynamic way?
I want to partion a table based on the client specific id and I want these values (client id's) to be passed dynamically to the create partition function.
I am not familiar with partitioning so it will be great if someone guides me (I am also reading some articles on partitioning, but it will be easier with some help)
The table I am trying to partition has like 80 million rows with four client's data as of now and will be more once we implement new clients.
I also think Partition will help, because before we load a client's data, we remove the data that is already out there (we flush previous qtr data before we insert this qtr data)
Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks
Raj
two questions:
Im using Snapshot replication;
1. how can I replicate database1.table1 to database2.tablex1
by default replication will replicate it to database2.table1
2. If i have database2.table1 sitting on 10 partitions
where table is partitioned on PK_x where x is divided by 10
how can i make tableX1 to be a member of database2.table1
sitting on the 7th partition. that is pk_x = 70-79
partition schemes and function are already set
thanks
Hi Experts,
I am new to Table Partitioning, Can any body guide me how to do table partitioning?
any way here is my scenario, we are having one database called "DATA" in SQL 2000 server and we have migrated to SQL 2005 by using backup and restore. and "DATA" is having about 15 tables and they are very very very big in size. and they dont have any index on a coulum name "DATETIME", but i want make table partition according to that perticular field "DATETIME" and right present we are having 6 months of data.
So, how to proceed further?
Your help will be appreciable..
i am trying to partition an sql table in sql server 2005, i created the partition schema and the data files that i want the data to be filled in after the partition. After the partition is finished sql gave me partition is successful , but i noticed that the size of data files i created has not increased and their sizes are the same.
notice: i have a clustered index on this table, so i dropped this index and recreated it
Bellow the script that i am using
and thank you for your help in advance
Hello frnds....what does mean by this ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello frnds......what does mean by Horizontal Partitioning ?
View 4 Replies View Related