<p>I'm comparing between two techniques to create partitioned tables in SQL 2005.</p>

<ul>
<li>Use partitioned views with a standard version of SQL 2005 (described <a href="http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQL+Server+2005/61676/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>)</li>
<li>Use the built in partition in the Enterprise edition of SQL 2005 (described <a href="http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQL+Server+2005/61765/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>)</li>
</ul>

<p>Given that the enterprise edition is much more expensive, I would like to know what are the main benefits of the newer enterprise built-in implementation. Is it just an time saver for the implementation itself. Or will I gain real performance on large DBs?</p>

<p>I know i can adjust the constraints in the first option to keep a sliding window into the partitions. Can I do it with the built in version?</p>

[{'answer_id': 27196, 'author': 'TheSmurf', 'author_id': 1975282, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1975282', 'pm_score': 4, 'selected': True, 'text': '<p>Yes and no. Cases can be linked to each other, but if you\'re looking for a tree of cases (prerequisites and such), you need FogBugz 7 or later.</p>\n\n<p>If you\'re using FogBugz 7.3 or greater, you can now use the <a href="http://www.fogcreek.com/fogbugz/plugins/plugin.aspx?ixPlugin=57" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Case Dependency Plugin</a>, which was released in April 2011.</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 27199, 'author': 'Tall Jeff', 'author_id': 1553, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1553', 'pm_score': 3, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>You didn\'t define what you mean by <em>dependencies</em> exactly, but if you mean that the resolution of one case requires the resolution of others - formally the answer is no. However, you can refer to other cases from a base case and FogBugz will track the cross references. For example, if you say "see case 2031" in the text of one case, the 2031 portion will turn into a hyperlink and both cases will now report that they refer to each other (both forwards and backwards). It\'s a pretty cool feature actually.</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 1231313, 'author': 'Mark', 'author_id': 150794, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/150794', 'pm_score': 2, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>FogBugz 7 now supports sub-cases.  This may or may not solve your problem, depending on how you want to handle it.</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 1241711, 'author': 'Rich Armstrong', 'author_id': 52680, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/52680', 'pm_score': 4, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>FogBugz has long supported case "relation", which creates an ad hoc link between cases simply through adding "case 1234" to any note. Downside: these are not removable, and this persists into FogBugz 7. (We tried to figure out how to do it right, but just ran out of time, so we left current behavior.)</p>\n\n<p>FogBugz 7, newly released, has added parent-child hierarchy, to allow you to split up a master case into its constituent parts, or to aggregate similar requests under one umbrella case.</p>\n\n<p>FogBugz 7 also offers milestone dependencies, where one milestone cannot be started before another is complete.  This only applies to the scheduling features of the software. We don\'t actually prevent anyone from working on cases in the dependent milestone.</p>\n\n<p>We feel these features represent the real world of dependencies as they exist among different parts of a project.</p>\n\n<p>We intentionally did not implement any sort of Bugzilla-style blocking, for several reasons.  First, it can be horrendously inefficient, allowing people to ignore work that they could easily do if it was in front of them. Second, it can cause a morass of interdependencies. Third, it also allows the use of the software as a social bludgeon, ("I can\'t start stubbing out functions until Jeff has finished his mock-ups.") which is something we try to avoid.  We make social software... in that we prefer to let social problems be solved socially and software problems be solved with software. The intentional omission of blocking or hard dependency between cases is part of this philosophy.</p>\n\n<p>That said, FogBugz 7 is highly extensible, with plug-ins, tags, custom fields, and lots of other goodies.  If blocking is what you want, I\'m sure someone will be able to cobble something together.</p>\n'}]
['https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/27206', 'https://Stackoverflow.com', 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1363/']