Partitioning advantages: do efficiency, security isolation, and load balancing count among common benefits of partitioning tables/data?

Introduction / Context:
Partitioning splits large tables or indexes into smaller, more manageable pieces based on range, list, or hash strategies. This question asks whether efficiency, security, and load balancing are legitimate benefits.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Efficiency: pruning reduces scanned data; maintenance can be targeted.
• Security/Isolation: partitions can be placed on different tablespaces or have different access controls or retention.
• Load balancing: partitions can be distributed across storage/compute to spread I/O and parallelize queries.

Concept / Approach:
These are standard arguments for partitioning, along with manageability, availability, and lifecycle management (rolling windows).

Step-by-Step Solution:
Define partitioning and common strategies (range/list/hash).Map benefits: pruning → efficiency; per-partition policies → security; distribution → load balancing.Conclude that the statement is valid.

Verification / Alternative check:
Most major DBMSs document these advantages and provide partition-wise operations for performance.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Benefits are not confined to backups, single nodes, a specific partition method, or indexes alone.

Common Pitfalls:
Poor partition key choice leading to skew; too many tiny partitions increasing overhead.

Final Answer:
Valid — these are recognized benefits of partitioning