Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6852661
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 27, 20262026-05-27T01:25:11+00:00 2026-05-27T01:25:11+00:00

I inhereted a unmaintained database in which the partition function was set on a

  • 0

I inhereted a unmaintained database in which the partition function was set on a date field and expired on the first of the year. The data is largely historic and I can control the jobs that import new data into this table.

My question is relating to setting up or altering partitioning to include so much data, roughly 1.5TB counting indexes. This is on a live system and I don’t know what kind of impact it will have with so many users connecting to it at once. I will test this on a non prod system but then I can’t get real usage load on there. My alternative solution was to kill all the users hitting the DB and quickly doing a rename of the table, and renaming a table that does have a proper partitioning scheme in.

I wanted to:

-Keep the same partition function but extend it to:
keep all 2011 data up to a certain date (let’s say Nov 22nd 2011) on 1 partition, all data coming in after that need to be put in their own new partitions

-Do a quick switch of the specific partition which has the full years worth of data

Anyone know if altering a partition on a live system to include a new partition for a full years worth of data, roughly 5-6 billion records and 1.5tb, is plausible? Any pitfalls? I will share my test results once I complete them but want any input. Thanks!

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-27T01:25:11+00:00Added an answer on May 27, 2026 at 1:25 am

    Partitions switch are a metadata only operation and the size of the partition switched in or out does not matter, it can be 1Kb or 1TB, it takes the exactly same amount of time (ie. very fast).

    However what you’re describing is not a partition switch operation, but a partition split: you want to split the last partition of the table into two partitions, one containing all the existing data and a new one empty. Splitting a partition has to split the data, and unfortunately this is an offline size-of-data operation.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I inherited MYSQL database that has lots of tables with data like CREATE TABLE
I inhereted a high volume OLTP DB which I have free reign to improve
I inherited a database from an old system we have, in which (among other
Inherited a database with min size for one data file (primary) at 10 gigs
I inherited an access 2003 ADP file which uses sql 2000 as it's data
I inherited a data-storage which was using simple text-files to save documents. Documents had
I inherited a database built with the idea that composite keys are much more
To set validation inside a Model in Rails, I should write something like: class
Inherited a set of jobs, and the logging to the filesystem begins with format
I inherited a project where each 'customer' has its own database. There are hundreds

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.