Archives of the TeradataForum
Message Posted: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 @ 13:41:34 GMT
Be very careful when planning deletes from PPI tables - we've had some interesting experiences with it recently. Specifically we don't see consistent behaviour in the use of 'fast path' delete processing. A lot of the time you would expect Teradata to logically delete partitions when it actually scans the partitions, performing a normal partial table delete (with the associated use of the Transient Journal - that's what really hit us). We saw similar problems with both a standard delete and an 'alter table' syntax.
Currently we are on V2R220.127.116.11 (if memory serves) and are using standard delete syntax;
delete table_1 where date_column between
and having (limited) success in having Teradata choose a fastpath delete with no Transient Journal usage. However, once the range between the lower and upper date gets past a certain point (this is not consistent and I think related to the volume of data between the ranges) we revert to a partition scan and delete using the TJ. If we need to change the partitioning we would delete as above then alter the PI as below.
The moral of this (rather long winded) tale is to test your solution to within an inch of it's life, and get as much info from your Teradata service rep as possible on your specific release/patch and the way it handles PPI deletes.
|Copyright 2016 - All Rights Reserved|
|Last Modified: 27 Dec 2016|