PFC <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I really like this. It's clean, efficient, and easy to use. > > This would be a lot faster than using temp tables. > Creating cursors is very fast so we can create two, and avoid doing > twice the same work (ie. hashing the ids from the results to grab categories > only once). Creating cursors for a simple plan like a single sequential scan is fast because it's using the original data from the table. But your example was predicated on this part of the job being a complex query. If it's a complex query involving joins and groupings, etc, then it will have to be materialized and there's no (good) reason for that to be any faster than a temporary table which is effectively the same thing. -- greg
