Local temporary table VS derived table type

[former_member185511]

Hi all,

As i saw from tutorials or posts developers are writing their codes like

ET_VAL = Select .........

i didnt' get why people are using like that ?

I just made a performance test using on my Procedure

ET_VAL = Select * from table 

vs

create local temporary table #et_VAl like ZXXX ;
select * from table into #et_val.

Procedure has 500 lines of codes with more than 30 selects.

If i use temporary tables, code runs faster comparing to derived table type. (here i assume, system trying to create structur dynamically )

But advantage of derived table type (i dont know if the "derived" terminology is correct) is no need to use drop statements and on system resources perspective may be more efficient.

[jasmin_gruschke]

Hi Bilen,

same comment here. We're focussing on ABAP on HANA topics. The performance questions you raise are more directed on SQLScript and native HANA development.

We can of course help you with questions concerning ABAP managed DB procedures but for questions on SQLScript or HANA engine performance (comparions), you might rather address the HANA in-memory experts in or . The (right) experts might not monitor the ABAP on HANA community :-(.

Cheers,

  Jasmin

[former_member185511]

actually i already moved before you post

[jasmin_gruschke]

Hi Bilen,

sorry, didn't want to be inhospital .
Please join us back if you have tighter-related ABAP questions .

Cheers,
Jasmin