On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 9:06 AM Michael Lewis <mle...@entrata.com> wrote:
> Thus, what I'm looking for here is way to store the information and then >> pass that information to the next query efficiently. >> For example, is it possible to define a struct of my choice, private to >> the current transaction, that would store the data and then pass it around >> to the next query in the transaction without having to materialize that >> struct (or deal with concurrency issues as in the hash table approach >> mentioned earlier) . >> > > Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but why not use a temp table? > Right, or as Adrian and I pointed out, use a CTE (WITH) query, which will materialize any results you want for the query. Perhaps if you give us a working, reproducible, self contained example of what you expect we can help you better.
