On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 9:06 AM Michael Lewis <mlewis@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.
