Adding a Partition to a range-Hash partitioned Table

Similar Questions

• Possible to Exchange temporary table with composite range-hash partitioned table?

  Hello

  Using oracle 11.2.0.3

  We want to clean up the data in some of our existing partitioned table.

  Afetr updates check spped that is too slow for us.

  Current table is partitioned the inetrval compoiste range-hash table.  Also it is compressed - enabled for compression of basis as well

  An interval of 1 month and 1 partition by month and 4 secondary partitions in the partition of ecah.

  You want to create tenp table with the data of celan and exchange the data in this table in the 'dirty' uisng existing partitions partition exchnage.

  Is this possible?

  The plan is

  1) create temporary table containing data for 1 partition (1 month worth of data)

  (2) clean the data here

  (3) create new temporary table with these specific data which compressed and discovered partitioned with 4 secondary partitions

  (4) table 3 for swap partition dirty using partition excahnge.

  Thaks

  I think that this can be done with a combination of Exchange and Split partition partitions. Prior to Oracle 11 g, only way of redefining tables online was DBMS_REDEFINITION package. Now, you can redefine the use of partitions for Exchange & Split. Check

  http://www.Oracle-base.com/articles/Misc/partitioning-an-existing-table-using-Exchange-partition.php

  Maintenance of Partitions

  Kind regards

• Range-Hash verssu Hash Partitioning purely report performance

  Hello
  
  We evaluate different strategies and whereas hash and range-hash partitioning.
  
  While the range would give us additional cleaning options, is by far out up to priority for the reports to run as fast as possible.
  
  Central Oraxcle 11.2.0.3 in fact warehouse using large table estaimte will be 500 GB, surrogarte key star schema and the key to the substitution of the largest dimesnion partioned-hash with the surrogate key.
  
  According to your experience, the side purley perfomance queruy someone found the hash is significantly greater than parrtition by range of dates, then under hash partition.
  
  Queries do not use partition size.
  
  Greater hope of qwe benfit to win partitioning uses a parallel query + score-recognition of join between columns of hash-partitioedn (on the facts and the great dimesnion table.
  
  Thank you

  >
  We evaluate different strategies and whereas hash and range-hash partitioning.

  While the range would give us additional cleaning options, is by far out up to priority for the reports to run as fast as possible.

  Central Oraxcle 11.2.0.3 in fact warehouse using large table estaimte will be 500 GB, surrogarte key star schema and the key to the substitution of the largest dimesnion partioned-hash with the surrogate key.

  According to your experience, the side purley perfomance queruy someone found the hash is significantly greater than parrtition by range of dates, then under hash partition.

  Queries do not use partition size.

  Greater hope of qwe benfit to win partitioning uses a parallel query + score-recognition of join between columns of hash-partitioedn (on the facts and the great dimesnion table.
  >
  Objectives statements in this thread have some of the same problems and missing information that was your other thread.
  Re: Compress all the existing table ain dat

  So I would say the same thing, that I suggested it with minor changes.

  You give us your preferred solution instead of us giving that information about the PROBLEM you're trying to solve.

  You must first focus on the problem:

  1. define the problem - indicate the desired objectives
  2. identify the options and resources available to address the problem
  3. Select one or several small, these options for assessment earn and tests.
  4 testing of possible solutions
  5. Select and implement what you consider the "best" solution
  6. monitor the results
  >
  We evaluate different strategies and whereas hash and range-hash partitioning.
  >
  Why? 1. What is the problem that you are trying to address and what are your desired goals? Partitioning is a solution - what's the problem?
  >
  While the range would give us additional cleaning options, is by far out up to priority for the reports to run as fast as possible.
  >
  Great! Do you really need or even want options housekeeping? If so, which? Don't you bulk loads? Down periodically the data? How many times? Monthly? Every year?

  What is the relationship, in your analysis between partitioning and your reports running "as fast as possible? Give us some details. Why do you partitioning in general (range or range-hash in particular) will somehow make your reports run faster? What kind of reports? The amount of data they have access to produce? The amount of data returned in fact? How many times reports do work? How much of a problem reports are now? Generally meet their SLA? Or they RARELY meet their SLA?

  Partitioning is not a remedy of performance for badly written queries. Often the most effective way to improve the performance of reports is to resolve any issues the queries themselves may have or add appropriate indexes. You have exhausted these possibilities? Have you created and examined the execution plans for your key reports? That shows this analysis?
  >
  According to your experience, the side purley perfomance queruy someone found the hash is significantly greater than parrtition by range of dates, then under hash partition.
  >
  For a partitioned table, all data are stored in individual segments; a segment for each partition.

  For a partitioned table Sub all data are stored in the individual segments; a segment for each subpartition. There is NO data stored at the partition level.

  The type of partitioning (versus range-hash hash) and the type of data (partition versus subpartion) logic has no relevance in terms of performance.

  Performance of the queries are directly proportional the number of segments that should be available, the type of access (via the index or full scan) and the size of the segment (including the amount of data).

  The number of segments that should be available depends on the ability of the Oracle to prune partitions during the analysis statically or dynamically at run time.
  >
  Queries do not use partition size.
  >
  Partitioning then generally won't be valuable performance but only for maintenance operations.
  >
  Greater hope of qwe benfit to win partitioning uses a parallel query + score-recognition of join between columns of hash-partitioedn (on the facts and the great dimesnion table.
  >
  Please explain why you think that partitioning will provide this benefit.

  Oracle PARALLEL query very well on non-partitioned tables without using partition-wise joins. The latest version of Oracle also has a DBMS_PARALLEL_EXECUTE package that provides additional features for the realization of PARALLEL operations for many of the use cases more.

  Partitioning lends itself to a natural method of CHUNKing based on the scores/subparts, but that is not necessary to get the benefit of the PARALLEL use. The exception would be if provided partitioning segments that are on different axes or decrease disk IO conflicts.

  Another missing piece of key information are the number and the type of index that needs your reports. Will you be able to use mainly LOCAL partitioned indexes? Global index tend to destroy any maintenance performance that can be learned from partitioning.

• Rebuild the range-Hash partitioned local index

  Hi all
  
  We have a table with 400 million records in our dataware House environment. It is partitioned using range-Hash Partitioning composit. He used a global Indexes previously. Last month the global indices have been changed to the index the. Since then, Exchange and index rebuild partition takes twice against the take used previously. From my understanding local index should provide availability high and more usable in the warehouse environment. Please correct me if I'm wrong and give me your suggestion. Also, I'm looking for a good material for the exchange of the partition and Index rebild with locally manage the range-hash partitioned index. Let me know if you know a good link for this...
  
  
  Thanks in advance...

  Dear krmreddy,

  Carefully read the following link and I hope this will guide you;

  http://asktom.Oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0:P11_QUESTION_ID:223318100346512896

  Kind regards.

  Ogan

• Adding a Partition of lower range value

  Hi Experts,

  If you have created a table like:

  CREATE TABLE RANGE_PART_T

  (IDENTIFICATION NUMBER,

  EMP_NAME VARCHAR2 (20).

  USE VARCHAR2 (20).

  HIREDATE DATE

  )

  ALLOW THE MOVEMENT OF THE LINE

  partition by range (ID)

  (

  partition P1 values less than (40),

  partition P2 values less than (80),

  partition P3 values less than (160),

  partition P4 values less than (240)

  );

  I miss two partitions:

  Partition with value less than (120) and partition with value less than (200).

  How is it possible to add the partition with the lower range without a drop/recreate the table.

  SQL > ALTER TABLE RANGE_PART_T

  2 ADD PARTITION P5 VALUES LESS THAN (120);

  ADD PARTITION P5 VALUES LESS THAN (120)

  *

  ERROR on line 2:

  ORA-14074: partition bound must gather greater than that of the last partition

  Use following statement more your partition table. for example

  ALTER table RANGE_PART_T split partition P3 (120) (P6 partition, partition P3);

• Unique key on the partitioned table range

  Hello
  
  We use a range of composite range-hash partitioned table
  
  Use index - try to do this have same tablespace to the local partitions but not liking it
  
  ALTER table RETAILER_TRANSACTION_COMP_POR
  Add primary key constraint RETAILER_TRANSACTION_COMP_PK (DWH_NUM)
  using index
  LOCAL
  
  
  ORA-14039: partitioning columns must be a subset of the columns in a unique index key
  
  Without local then fine but does not have same tablespace to walls and don't want to make this part of the partition key.
  
  Range Tbal partitioned - it's just a UK to avoid duplicates

  [oracle@localhost ~]$ oerr ora 14039
  14039, 00000, "partitioning columns must form a subset of key columns of a UNIQUE index"
  // *Cause:  User attempted to create a UNIQUE partitioned index whose
  //          partitioning columns do not form a subset of its key columns
  //          which is illegal
  // *Action: If the user, indeed, desired to create an index whose
  //          partitioning columns do not form a subset of its key columns,
  //          it must be created as non-UNIQUE; otherwise, correct the
  //          list of key and/or partitioning columns to ensure that the index'
  //          partitioning columns form a subset of its key columns
  

• no boot device during the start of mini mac and bootcamp after adding the partition

  My mac mini is running el capitan and after I added a partition I don't got no boot device but can start at el capitan after pressing option. However, I can't start boot camp. Thank you!

  Last login: kills Mar 31 17:33:01 on ttys000

  independenceadec1s-Mac-mini: ~ the independenceadec1 list $ diskutil

  / dev/disk0 (internal, physical):

  #: NAME SIZE TYPE IDENTIFIER

  0: GUID_partition_scheme * GB 256.1 disk0

  1: disk0s1 EFI EFI 209.7 MB

  2: Untitled Apple_HFS 1 GB 172.5 disk0s2

  3: disk0s3 Apple_Boot Recovery 650.0 MB HD

  4: Microsoft database BOOTCAMP 82.7 GB disk0s4

  / dev/disk1 (internal, physical):

  #: NAME SIZE TYPE IDENTIFIER

  0: FDisk_partition_scheme * GB 31.9 disk1

  1: disk1s1 Windows_FAT_32 NO NAME 31.9 GB

  independenceadec1s-Mac-mini: ~ independenceadec1$

  By adding a third partition you have damaged the boot loader. If you use Boot Camp to run Windows, so you cannot add a third partition. To set things straight, you will need to repartition the disk to a single partition and try again. A $20 alternative that might work for troubleshoot you is Paragon CampTune X.

• Size of partition on interval range partitioned Table happens when SYSDATE is used in a Where Clause

  We have tables interval range partitioned on a DATE, with a partition for each day column - very standard and straight out of doc Oracle.

  A 3rd party application queries the tables to find the number of rows based on the date range that is located on the column used for the partition key.

  This application uses the date range specified from the current date - i.e. for last two days would be «...» StartDate > SYSDATE-2 "- but the partition size is irrelevant and the explain command plan shows that each partition is included."

  In presenting the request uses the date in a variable partition size location and query table is obviously much better.

  DB is 11.2.0.3 on RHEL6, and default settings - i.e. nothing that could influence the behavior of the optimizer to something unusual.

  I can't work on why this would be the case. It is very easy to reproduce with cases of simple test below.

  I would be very interested to hear any views on why it's that way and if anything can be done to allow the size of the partition to work with a query including SYSDATE because it would be difficult to get the application code has changed.

  In addition to make a case to change the code, I need an explanation of why query using SYSDATE is not advisable and I know this information.

  (1) create a simple partitioned table

  CREATETABLE part_test
     (id                      NUMBER NOT NULL,
      starttime               DATE NOT NULL,
      CONSTRAINT pk_part_test PRIMARY KEY (id)) 
  PARTITION BY RANGE (starttime) INTERVAL (NUMTODSINTERVAL(1,'day')) (PARTITION p0 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DATE('01-01-2013','DD-MM-YYYY')));
  

  (2) fill in the rows of the table 1 million distributed among 10 partitions

  BEGIN
      FOR i IN 1..1000000
      LOOP
          INSERT INTO part_test (id, starttime) VALUES (i, SYSDATE - DBMS_RANDOM.value(low => 1, high => 10));
      END LOOP;
  END;
  /
  EXEC dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('SUPER_CONF','PART_TEST');
  

  (3) to query the Table of data from the last 2 days using SYSDATE in paragraph

  EXPLAIN PLAN FOR 
  SELECT  count(*) 
  FROM    part_test
  WHERE   starttime >= SYSDATE - 2;
  

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  | ID | Operation | Name | Lines | Bytes | Cost (% CPU). Time | Pstart. Pstop |

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |           |     1.     3 ×  7895 (1) | 00:00:01 |       |       |

  |   1.  GLOBAL TRI |           |     1.     3 ×            |          |       |       |

  |   2.   RANGE OF PARTITION ITERATOR.           |   111K |   867K |  7895 (1) | 00:00:01 |   KEY | 1048575.

  |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL | PART_TEST |   111K |   867K |  7895 (1) | 00:00:01 |   KEY | 1048575.

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Information of predicates (identified by the operation identity card):

  ---------------------------------------------------

  3 - filter("STARTTIME">=SYSDATE@!-2)

  (4) now do the same query, but with SYSDATE - 2 presented as a literal value.

  This query returns the same response but very different cost.

  EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
  SELECT count(*) 
  FROM part_test
  WHERE starttime >= (to_date('23122013:0950','DDMMYYYY:HH24MI'))-2;
  

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  | ID | Operation | Name | Lines | Bytes | Cost (% CPU). Time | Pstart. Pstop |

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |           |     1.     8.   131 (0) | 00:00:01 |       |       |

  |   1.  GLOBAL TRI |           |     1.     8.            |          |       |       |

  |   2.   RANGE OF PARTITION ITERATOR.           |   111K |   867K |   131 (0) | 00:00:01 |   356 . 1048575.

  |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL | PART_TEST |   111K |   867K |   131 (0) | 00:00:01 |   356 | 1048575.

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Information of predicates (identified by the operation identity card):

  ---------------------------------------------------

  3 filter ("STARTTIME" > = TO_DATE (' 2013-12-21 09:50 ',' syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss'))))

  Thank you in anticipation

  Jim

  sysdate is not constant and its value may change from time optimization of execution; but the optimizer can deduce that he will be a known running value and then produce a plan that will make the size of partition running.  This is the meaning of 'KEY' in the column pstart – the partition of departure will be known at run time and the size of partition will take place in order to eliminate the previous partitions.

  Concerning

  Jonathan Lewis

• Error when adding a partition to a view of materlialized

  Hello
  
  I get this error when you add a partition to a materialized view.
  
  ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW mvedw statement. ADD PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN ('201304') MAR2013 MV_CLM_CAPITN_F
  *
  ERROR on line 1:
  
  ORA-14074: partition bound must gather greater than that of the last partition
  
  Please notify.
  
  Kind regards
  Narayan

  Well there you go - you already have this partition you want to add
  >
  MVEDW MV_CLM_CAPITN_F MAR2013 ' 201304'
  >
  Then why you try to do this?
  >
  ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW mvedw statement. ADD PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN ('201304') MAR2013 MV_CLM_CAPITN_F
  >
  It is the SAME name of the partition and the value ('201304') in the list of partitions that you just posted.

  Maybe someone else added the partition when you weren't looking.

• Try to convert the partitioned Table of interval in the range... Swap partition...

  Requirement:
  
  Interval of replacement partitioned Table by range partitioned Table
  

  DROP TABLE A;
  
  CREATE TABLE A
  (
     a              NUMBER,
     CreationDate   DATE
  )
  PARTITION BY RANGE (CreationDate)
     INTERVAL ( NUMTODSINTERVAL (30, 'DAY') )
     (PARTITION P_FIRST
         VALUES LESS THAN (TIMESTAMP ' 2001-01-01 00:00:00'));
  
  
  INSERT INTO A
       VALUES (1, SYSDATE);
  
  INSERT INTO A
       VALUES (1, SYSDATE - 30);
  
  INSERT INTO A
       VALUES (1, SYSDATE - 60);

  I need to change this partitioned Table apart to a partitioned range Table. I can do using the EXCHANGE PARTITION. Like if I use the classic method to create another table range partitioned, then:
  
  

  DROP TABLE A_Range
  CREATE TABLE A_Range
  (
  a NUMBER,
  CreationDate DATE
  )
  PARTITION BY RANGE (CreationDate)
     (partition MAX values less than (MAXVALUE));
  
  Insert  /*+ append */  into A_Range Select * from A; --This Step takes very very long..Trying to cut it short using Exchange Partition.

  Problems:
  
  I can't do
  

   ALTER TABLE A_Range
    EXCHANGE PARTITION MAX
    WITH TABLE A
    WITHOUT VALIDATION;
   

  ORA-14095: ALTER TABLE CHANGE requires a not partitioned table nonclustered
  This is because the tables are partitioned. So it does not allow me.
  
  If I instead:
  
  
  Create a table that is not partitioned for exchanging data by partition.
  

    Create Table A_Temp as Select * from A;
    
     ALTER TABLE A_Range
    EXCHANGE PARTITION MAX
    WITH TABLE A_TEMP
    WITHOUT VALIDATION;
     
    select count(*) from A_Range partition(MAX);
   

  -The problem is that all the data is in MAX Partition.
  Even after the creation of a large number of partitions by walls of separation, the data is still in MAX Partition only.
  
  So:
  
  -What we cannot replace a partitioned Table to the Table partitioned using the EXCHANGE PARTITION range interval. that is, we have to insert in...
  -We can do it, but I'm missing something here.
  -If all the data is in MAX Partition due to "WITHOUT VALIDATION", can say us be redistributed in the right type of range partitions.

  You must pre-create the partitions in a_range and then swap one for one for a tmp, and then to arange. With the help of your sample (thanks to proviing code, incidentally).

  SQL> CREATE TABLE A
    2  (
    3     a              NUMBER,
    4     CreationDate   DATE
    5  )
    6  PARTITION BY RANGE (CreationDate)
    7     INTERVAL ( NUMTODSINTERVAL (30, 'DAY') )
    8     (PARTITION P_FIRST
    9         VALUES LESS THAN (TIMESTAMP ' 2001-01-01 00:00:00'));
  
  Table created.
  
  SQL> INSERT INTO A VALUES (1, SYSDATE);
  
  1 row created.
  
  SQL> INSERT INTO A VALUES (1, SYSDATE - 30);
  
  1 row created.
  
  SQL> INSERT INTO A VALUES (1, SYSDATE - 60);
  
  1 row created.
  
  SQL> commit;
  
  Commit complete.
  

  You can find the form of existing partitions assistance:

  SQL> select table_name, partition_name, high_value
    2  from user_tab_partitions
    3  where table_name = 'A';
  
  TABLE_NAME PARTITION_NAME HIGH_VALUE
  ---------- -------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  A          P_FIRST        TO_DATE(' 2001-01-01 00:00:00', 'SYYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS', 'NLS_CALENDAR=GREGORIA
  A          SYS_P44        TO_DATE(' 2013-01-28 00:00:00', 'SYYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS', 'NLS_CALENDAR=GREGORIA
  A          SYS_P45        TO_DATE(' 2012-12-29 00:00:00', 'SYYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS', 'NLS_CALENDAR=GREGORIA
  A          SYS_P46        TO_DATE(' 2012-11-29 00:00:00', 'SYYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS', 'NLS_CALENDAR=GREGORIA
  

  You can then create the table a_range with apporopriate partitions. Note that you may need to create additional in a_range partitions because the partitioning interval does not create the partitions has no data for, even if that leaves 'holes' in the partitioning scheme. So, on that basis:

  SQL> CREATE TABLE A_Range (
    2     a NUMBER,
    3     CreationDate DATE)
    4  PARTITION BY RANGE (CreationDate)
    5     (partition Nov_2012 values less than (to_date('30-nov-2012', 'dd-mon-yyyy')),
    6      partition Dec_2012 values less than (to_date('31-dec-2012', 'dd-mon-yyyy')),
    7      partition Jan_2013 values less than (to_date('31-jan-2013', 'dd-mon-yyyy')),
    8      partition MAX values less than (MAXVALUE));
  
  Table created.
  

  Now, create a regular table to use in the constituencies:

  SQL> CREATE TABLE A_tmp (
    2     a              NUMBER,
    3     CreationDate   DATE);
  
  Table created.
  

  and all partitions in Exchange:

  SQL> ALTER TABLE A
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION sys_p44
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE A_Range
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION jan_2013
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE A
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION sys_p45
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE A_Range
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION dec_2012
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE A
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION sys_p46
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE A_Range
    2    EXCHANGE PARTITION nov_2012
    3    WITH TABLE A_tmp;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> select * from a;
  
  no rows selected
  
  SQL> select * from a_range;
  
           A CREATIOND
  ---------- ---------
           1 23-NOV-12
           1 23-DEC-12
           1 22-JAN-13
  

  John

• TIMESTAMP (6) partitioned key-> range partitioned table ddl needed

  What is the DDL TIMESTAMP syntax (6) partitioned key, range partitioned table
  
  Published by: oracletune on January 11, 2013 10:26

  >
  What is the DDL TIMESTAMP syntax (6) partitioned key, range partitioned table
  >
  Don't know what you're asking. Are you asking how to create a table partitioned using a TIMESTAMP column (6) for the key?

  CREATE TABLE TEST1
  (
      USERID                 NUMBER,
      ENTRYCREATEDDATE     TIMESTAMP(6)
  )
  PARTITION BY RANGE (ENTRYCREATEDDATE) INTERVAL(NUMTOYMINTERVAL(1, 'MONTH'))
  (
      PARTITION P0 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DATE('1-1-2013', 'DD-MM-YYYY'))
  )
  

  See my answer posted: January 10, 2013 21:56 if you need to do on a TIMESTAMP with TIME ZONE column. You must add a virtual column.
  Creating scores of auto range

• I need to change the column of the range on my partition table

  Hello
  
  I created a partition table, but I need to change column of the range "CREATED" to "PREPARED". Two of them date format, but I can't modify this table.
  
  PARTITION OF RANGE (CREATED)--> I need to change column "CREATED" as "PREPARED".
  (
  INV08 PARTITION VALUES LESS (TO_DATE('01-SEP-2010','DD-MON-YYYY')).
  INV09 PARTITION VALUES LESS (TO_DATE('01-OCT-2010','DD-MON-YYYY')).
  INV10 PARTITION VALUES LESS (TO_DATE('01-NOV-2010','DD-MON-YYYY')).
  PARTITION INV VALUES LESS THAN (MAXVALUE)
  )
  
  How can I do?
  
  Published by: user567352 on December 23, 2010 04:10

  Hello

  As far as I know, dbms_redefinition didn't even know about the partitioning:

  1. you create a new empty table that matches your need + (that is where you defined you new partition key) +.
  2. you start the names of submiting of redefinition of existing and newly created table 'interim' table
  3. you leave enough time to get the work done
  4. you have finished redefining (the name of the table are swapped)
  And voila!

  Be sure to test thorougly the process of redefinition and the performance impact that may occur until you make it to your production !
  ;-)

• Adding a new partition to a partitioned table

  Hi all
  
  I try to add a new partition to an existing table in compartmentalized but I need the new partition of 'table' to go to tablespace DATA_2011 and partition "index" to go to INDEX_2011. I tried but it wrong on what follows.
  
  CREATE TABLE employees
  (employee_id number 4 NOT NULL,
  last_name VARCHAR2 (10),
  department_id NUMBER (2))
  PARTITION OF RANGE (department_id)
  (PARTITION employees_part1 VALUES LESS THAN (11) TABLESPACE DATA_2010,)
  PARTITION employees_part2 VALUES LESS THAN (21) TABLESPACE DATA_2010;
  PARTITION employees_part3 VALUES LESS THAN (31) TABLESPACE DATA_2010);
  
  CREATE INDEX employees_local_idx ON employees (employee_id) LOCAL
  (PARTITION TABLESPACE INDEX_2010 employees_part1,
  PARTITION employees_part2 TABLESPACE INDEX_2010,
  PARTITION employees_part3 TABLESPACE INDEX_2010);
  
  
  Here's what I'm trying to run but it fails...
  ALTER table employees add PARTITION "EMPLOYEES_PART4" VALUES LESS THAN (41) DATA_2011 index tablespace tablespace INDEX_2011;
  
  ERROR on line 1:
  ORA-14020: this physical attribute may not be specified for the partition table
  
  
  
  Succeeds what follows, but in this case the index partition "EMPLOYEES_PART4" is also assigned to DATA_2011 tablespace.
  
  ALTER table employees add PARTITION "EMPLOYEES_PART4" VALUES LESS THAN (41) tablespace DATA_2011;
  
  
  Any ideas... I am currently looking in the documentation to see if it would be possible?
  
  Thanks for your time...

  Hello

  ALTER table employees add PARTITION "EMPLOYEES_PART4" VALUES LESS THAN (41) tablespace DATA_2011;

  The foregoing is the corect order and therefore succeeded.

  but in this case the index partition "EMPLOYEES_PART4" is also assigned to DATA_2011 tablespace.

  You need rebuild the index of the partition with the name desired tablespace. /

  ALTER index rebuild partition tablespace

  Anand

• need to unpack a hash partitioned table

  I'm working on the database oracle 11.1.0.7 on solaris.
  
  We had problems loading data in compressed tables, so we try to unpack tables and their partitions.
  When I tried to unpacking of a hash partitioned table, I get this error
  
  SQL > alter table move partition SYS_1 sample nocompress;
  ALTER table move partition SYS_1 nocompress sample
  *
  ERROR on line 1:
  ORA-14260: incorrect physical attribute specified for this partition
  
  I am able to move the table, it's just the nocompress option is not working.
  
  SQL > alter table example moving partition SYS_1.
  
  Modified table.
  
  Can't unpack us a hash partitioned table that is compressed?

  You must do this in two steps

  alter table sample modify partition SYS_1 nocompress;
  alter table sample move partition SYS_1;
  

  Best regards

  Maxim

• Adding a column to a partitioned table.

  I have a table that is partitioned (monthly, based on a date column). There are 13 partitions - twelve more a current previous months, and we ride every month.
  
  We want to add a column to the table. Is there something special about adding a column to a partitioned table, or is it like any other ALTER TABLE... ADD...?

  Raindog wrote:
  I have a table that is partitioned (monthly, based on a date column). There are 13 partitions - twelve more a current previous months, and we ride every month.

  We want to add a column to the table. Is there something special about adding a column to a partitioned table, or is it like any other ALTER TABLE... ADD...?

  There is nothing else a simple non partitioned tables. Easy to use "" alter table add ".