Perhaps I should have been clearer:

I meant that since the parameter would have to be constructed outside the
SP anyway - why not just construct an order by clause (I wasn't suggesting
to use the *actual* parameter externally, or internally, to the SP -
sorry).

I take Adam's point about index walks vs in-mem sorts - and agree that
it's context-specific - and may be why Vlad doesn't want to go this way.

Max

> At 09:12 AM 10/01/2007, Max Renshaw wrote:
>>Is it not possible to:
>>SELECT * FROM GET_DATA(IN_USER_ID) ORDER BY IN_ORDER_BY
>>ie order outside the SP?
>
> If IN_ORDER_BY is an output field of the selectable stored procedure

(which it's not in this example) you could. It would be a horrible
no-op, but you could....

>
> You would need to define IN_ORDER_BY as a RETURNS() item and
> implement some mechanism inside the processing loop in the SP to

increment this variable at each turn of the loop. The entire

> procedure would have to execute before there was anything to sort by,

i.e. the whole output set, encompassing all of the values of
IN_ORDER_BY.

>
> In practical terms it would be useless/pointless. For this
> manufactured ordering field to be meaningful, your SP would need to be

processing the underlying records in the desired order...so you are back
to Square One, actually, still needing an input variable to be used to
form the set either conditionally or using EXECUTE

> STATEMENT in a FOR loop...
>
> ./heLen
>
>