Skip Headers
Oracle® Database VLDB and Partitioning Guide
11g Release 2 (11.2)

Part Number E16541-05
Go to Documentation Home
Go to Book List
Book List
Go to Table of Contents
Go to Index
Go to Master Index
Master Index
Go to Feedback page
Contact Us

Go to previous page
Go to next page
View PDF

7 Using Partitioning in an Online Transaction Processing Environment

Partitioning was initially adopted to cope with the performance requirements for data warehouses. With the explosive growth of OLTP systems and their user populations, partitioning is particularly useful for OLTP systems as well.

Partitioning is often used for OLTP systems to reduce contention to support a very large user population. It also helps in addressing regulatory requirements facing OLTP systems, including storing larger amounts of data in a cost-effective manner. This chapter contains the following topics:

What is an OLTP System?

An Online Transaction Processing (OLTP) system is a common data processing system in today's enterprises. Classical examples of OLTP systems are order entry, retail sales, and financial transaction systems.

OLTP systems are primarily characterized through a specific data usage that is different from data warehousing environments, yet some characteristics, such as having large volumes of data and lifecycle-related data usage and importance, are identical.

The main characteristics of an OLTP environment are:

The following are benefits of partitioning for OLTP environments:


Performance in OLTP environments heavily relies on performant index access, thus the choice of the most appropriate index strategy becomes crucial. The following section discusses best practices for deciding whether to partition indexes in an OLTP environment.

Deciding Whether to Partition Indexes

Due to the selectivity of queries and high concurrency of OLTP applications, the choice of the right index strategy is indisputably an important decisions for the use of partitioning in an OLTP environment. The following basic rules help understand the main benefits and trade-offs for the various possible index structures:

  • A nonpartitioned index, while larger than individual partitioned index segments, always leads to a single index probe (or scan) if an index access path is chosen; there is only one segment for a table. The data access time and number of blocks being accessed is identical for both a partitioned and a nonpartitioned table.

    A nonpartitioned index does not provide partition autonomy and requires an index maintenance operation for every partition maintenance operation that affects rowids (for example, drop, truncate, move, merge, coalesce, or split operations).

  • With partitioned indexes, there are always multiple segments. Whenever Oracle Database cannot prune down to a single index segment, the database has to touch multiple segments. This potentially leads to higher I/O requirements (n index segment probes compared with one probe with a nonpartitioned index) and can have an impact (measurable or not) on the run-time performance. This is true for all partitioned indexes.

    Partitioned indexes can either be local partitioned indexes or global partitioned indexes. Local partitioned indexes always inherit the partitioning key from the table and are fully aligned with the table partitions. Consequently, any kind of partition maintenance operation requires little to no index maintenance work. For example, dropping or truncating a partition does not incur any measurable overhead for index maintenance; the local index partitions are either dropped or truncated.

    Partitioned indexes that are not aligned with the table are called global partitioned indexes. Unlike local indexes, there is no relation between a table and an index partition. Global partitioned indexes give the flexibility to choose a partitioning key that is most optimal for a performant partition index access. Partition maintenance operations normally affect more (if not all) partitions of a global partitioned index, depending on the operation and partitioning key of the index.

  • Under some circumstances, having multiple segments for an index can be beneficial for performance. It is very common in OLTP environments to leverage sequences to create artificial keys; consequently you create key values that are monotonically increasing, which results in many insert processes competing for the same index blocks. Introducing a global partitioned index (for example, using global hash partitioning on the key column) can alleviate this situation. If you have, for example, four hash partitions for such an index, then you now have four index segments you are inserting data into, reducing the concurrency on these segments by a factor of four for the insert processes.

With less contention, the application can support a larger user population. The following example shows the creation of a unique index on the order_id column of the orders table. The order_id in the OLTP application is filled using a sequence number. The unique index uses hash partitioning to reduce contention for the monotonically increasing order_id values. The unique key is then used to create the primary key constraint.

ON orders(order_id)

PRIMARY KEY (order_id)

Enforcing uniqueness is important database functionality for OLTP environments. Uniqueness can be enforced with nonpartitioned and with partitioned indexes. However, because partitioned indexes provide partition autonomy, the following requirements must be met to implement unique indexes:

  • A nonpartitioned index can enforce uniqueness for any given column or combination of columns. The behavior of a nonpartitioned index is no different for a partitioned table compared to a nonpartitioned table.

  • Each partition of a partitioned index is considered an autonomous segment. To enforce the autonomy of these segments, you always have to include the partitioning key columns as a subset of the unique key definition.

    • Unique global partitioned indexes must always be prefixed with the partitioning columns.

    • Unique local indexes must have the partitioning key of the table as a subset of the unique key definition.

Using Index-Organized Tables

When your workload fits the use of index-organized tables, then you must consider how to use partitioning on your index-organized table and on any secondary indexes. For more information about how to create partitioned index-organized tables, refer to Chapter 4, "Partition Administration".

See Also:

Oracle Database Administrator's Guide for more information about index-organized tables

Whether to partition secondary indexes on index-organized tables follows the same considerations as indexes on regular heap tables. You can partition an index-organized table, but the partitioning key must be a subset of the primary key. A common reason to partition an index-organized table is to reduce contention; this is typically achieved using hash partitioning.

Another reason to partition an index-organized table is to be able to physically separate data sets based on a primary key column. For example, an application hosting company can physically separate application instances for different customers by list partitioning on the company identifier. Queries in such a scenario can often take advantage of index partition pruning, shortening the time for the index scan. ILM scenarios with index-organized tables and partitioning are less common because they require a date column to be part of the primary key.


In addition to the performance benefits, Partitioning also enables the optimal data management for large objects in an OLTP environment. Every partition maintenance operation in the Oracle database can be extended to atomically include global and local index maintenance, enabling the execution of any partition maintenance operation without affecting the 24x7 availability of an OLTP environment.

Partition maintenance operations in OLTP systems occur often because of ILM scenarios. In these scenarios, [range | interval] partitioned tables, or [range | interval]-* composite partitioned tables, are common.

Other business cases for partition maintenance operations include scenarios surrounding the separation of application data. For example, a retail company runs the same application for multiple branches in a single schema. Depending on the branch revenues, the application (as separate partitions) is stored on more performant storage. List partitioning, or list-* composite partitioning, is a common partitioning strategy for this type of business case.

Hash partitioning, or hash subpartitioning for tables, can be used in OLTP systems to obtain similar performance benefits to the performance benefits achieved in data warehouse environments. The majority of the daily OLTP workload consists of relatively small operations, executed in serial. Periodic batch operations, however, may execute in parallel and benefit from the distribution benefits hash partitioning and subpartitioning can provide for partition-wise joins. For example, end-of-the-month interest calculation may be executed in parallel to complete within a nightly batch window.

For more information about the performance benefits of partitioning, refer to Chapter 3, "Partitioning for Availability, Manageability, and Performance".

Impact of a Partition Maintenance Operation on a Partitioned Table with Local Indexes

Whenever a partition maintenance operation takes place, Oracle locks the affected table partitions for any DML operation. Data in the affected partitions, except a DROP or TRUNCATE operation, is still fully accessible for any SELECT operation. Because local indexes are logically coupled with the table (data) partitions, only the local index partitions of the affected table partitions have to be maintained as part of a partition maintenance operation, enabling the most optimal processing for the index maintenance.

For example, when you move an older partition from a high end storage tier to a low cost storage tier, the data and the index are always available for SELECT operations; the necessary index maintenance is either to update the existing index partition to reflect the new physical location of the data or, more commonly, a move and rebuild of the index partition to a low cost storage tier as well. If you drop an older partition after you have archived it, then its local index partitions get dropped as well, enabling a split-second partition maintenance operation that only affects the data dictionary.

Impact of a Partition Maintenance Operation on Global Indexes

Whenever a global index is defined on a partitioned or nonpartitioned table, there is no correlation between a distinct table partition and the index. Consequently, any partition maintenance operation affects all global indexes or index partitions. As with tables containing local indexes, the affected partitions are locked to prevent DML operations against the affected table partitions. However, unlike the index maintenance for local indexes, any global index is still fully available for DML operations and does not affect the online availability of the OLTP system. Conceptually and technically, the index maintenance for global indexes for a partition maintenance operation is comparable to the index maintenance that would become necessary for a semantically identical DML operation.

For example, dropping an old partition is semantically equivalent to deleting all the records of the old partition using the SQL DELETE statement. In both cases, all index entries of the deleted data set have to be removed from any global index as a normal index maintenance operation which does not affect the availability of an index for SELECT and DML operations. In this scenario, a drop operation represents the most optimal approach: data is removed without the overhead of a conventional DELETE operation and the global indexes are maintained in a nonintrusive manner.

Common Partition Maintenance Operations in OLTP Environments

The two most common partition maintenance operations are the removal of data and the relocation of data onto lower cost storage tier devices.

Removing (Purging) Old Data

Using either a DROP or TRUNCATE operation removes older data based on the partitioning key criteria. The drop operation removes the data and the partition metadata, while a truncate operation only removes the data but preserve the metadata. All local index partitions are dropped respectively, and truncated. Normal index maintenance is done for partitioned or nonpartitioned global indexes and is fully available for select and DML operations.

The following example drops all data older than January 2006 from the orders table. Note that as part of the drop statement, an UPDATE GLOBAL INDEXES statement is executed, so that the global index remains usable throughout the maintenance operation. Any local index partitions are dropped as part of this operation.

ALTER TABLE orders DROP PARTITION p_before_jan_2006

Moving and/or Merging Older Partitions to a Low Cost Storage Tier Device

Using a MOVE or MERGE operation as part of an Information lifecycle Management strategy, you can relocate older partitions to the most cost-effective storage tier. The data is available for SELECT but not for DML operations during the operation. Local indexes are maintained and you most likely relocate those as part of the merge or move operation as well. Normal index maintenance is done for partitioned or nonpartitioned global indexes and is fully available for select and DML operations.

The following example shows how to merge the January 2006 and February 2006 partitions in the orders table, and store them in a different tablespace. Any local index partitions are also moved to the ts_low_cost tablespace as part of this operation. The UPDATE INDEXES clause ensures that all indexes remain usable throughout and after the operation without additional rebuilds.

MERGE PARTITIONS p_2006_jan,p_2006_feb
TABLESPACE ts_low_cost

For more information about the benefits of partition maintenance operations for Information Lifecycle Management, see Chapter 5, "Using Partitioning for Information Lifecycle Management".