Re: Slight "I have some string, how lng it it, BTW, it's blue" question

"Brian Peasland" <oracle_dba_at_nospam.peasland.net> wrote in message news:J0HyE7.xG_at_igsrsparc2.er.usgs.gov...
> > : If you use a view and query from the view, you are using a SQL
solution.
> > : Using cursors to do your join will usually be slower than doing it
with
> > : a well-formed SQL statement.
> >
> > can you expand on what you mean by 'Using cursors to do your join'? are
you
> > really indicating using more than one SQL statement and somehow
performing
> > the join programmatically? after all a 'join' is by definition down
within a
> > SQL statement which is run within a cursor -- so what am i missing here?
>
> You'd have to ask the OP. It was he who said "Sorry it this isn't clear
> - the reasoning behind
> some of the use of cursors to mimic joins is way beyond me." I'm
> assuming that he is processing
> the join programmatically, but that is just an assumption.
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>

Well - it's a trivial join n most respects. I'm now a grunt - but used to call the shots as far as standards went. One stamdard was - "Use a cursor when you can avoid it, kiss your arse goodbye" To put the point bluntly - I'm baffled by the concept that rather than use a well structured set of views - you basically write COBOL in PL/SQL OK - if you get paid, you do what you're told - but #i consider it to be a personal affront - and would like ammo to try and change it. Hell - our hardware supplier must be making a fortune we should not be paying on the back of this approach.
Even more than SQLServer on NT - I'd expect huge gains with cunning ( or totally bleeding obvious) use of the parallism you can get by splitting queries over several views. Seems a no brainer to me - but apparently I'm wrong. Received on Wed Jun 07 2006 - 18:56:17 CDT