Re: AW: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0

Zeugswetter Andreas IZ5 wrote:
>
> Asside from that, I think anybody having a (non blob) table of 2-4 Gb and
> above should start thinking of a redesign of his data model. Often the
> solution is to have e.g. one table per year and a union all view, so that
> clients can access all data without even noticing.

Oracle approaches this problem from the other end. In ver 8.x you can
define
virtual tables (or some name like that), which are actually views of
existing
tables. These act mostly as ordinary tables - you can define indexes on
them,
insert/delet/update, views, etc. - except that the data is actually
stored in
the main table.

> I think smart rewrite rules can be implemented, so that updates,
> inserts and deletes are routed to the correct table (let's call it
> fragment).

Probably, but why must one do that extra work which should be done by
the
database (in an ideal world) ?

Oracles virtual tables are probably 'smart rewrite rules', just the user
does not have to be too smart to use them.

----------------
Hannu