Post reply

Partitioning Table - is this a bug???

  • November 20, 2006 at 4:01 am

    #117803

    I've observed this behaviour now on 2 separate SQLServers, one at base level, one at SP1, and I'm sure this isn't how things are supposed to work ....

    I've got 4 separate tables holding existing data.

    I create 3 new filegroups, 3 new datafiles on my database.

    I create a partition function on a date range.

    I create a partition scheme that maps the partition function to a date column that exists in each table.

    I create a new, single table with the identical structure to each of the 4 existing tables, and create it specifying the partition scheme in the syntax.

    I insert the data into the new table from each of the 4 existing tables.

    I check the data distribution across the partitions, and it is nicely spread by date.

    So far so good.

    I DROP my new table, and recreate exactly as before, but this time DO NOT specify the partition schem in the syntax - just the underlying filegroup (as I would if I did not want the table to be partitioned).

    I insert the same data again from the 4 existing tables, but when I check the partition distribution the data is STILL spread across the partition. (!!??)

    I drop both the partition scheme and partition function.

    I check the data distribution again, and now get no results (which is good, because the partition no longer exists).

    I recreate the partition function and scheme, check the partition distribution, and instantly see that the data is now apaprently distributed across the brand new partition scheme again, even though it has just been dropped!

    I drop all partition schemes, function, and my NEW table.

    I recreate the partition scheme and function.

    I create the NEW table again, but NOT on the PS - ONLY on the filegroup.

    I insert the data, and it immediately becomes partitioned, yet this table has NEVER been defined on a partition scheme!!

    I don't believe this is correct - am I missing something obvious??

  • November 21, 2006 at 6:58 am

    #673189

    Not quite sure about your testing process.  When you create a table without partitioning (no PS), you can only associate one file group to the table. You mean the data was saved to files in other file group too when you said "data was still partitioned"?

     

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 1 (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply