On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Bill Moseley <moseley at hank.org> wrote: > Poking around the Internet you can find recommendations against using > UNIONS for performance reasons and suggestions to use a join, instead. Did YOU experience any performance issues? It's the definition of a view we are talking about here. If there are two ways to return the same result, then you can easily change the method if it turns out you need a performance boost. Until then, I wouldn't waste my time. > But, I'm being thick today and not seeing how to accomplish that with > a join instead. What you are trying to do is a UNION. You should write it as a UNION unless you come across a very good reason not to. I would suggest using "UNION ALL" unless you care about duplicate settings shared by account and user and want them de-duplicated. -- Matt Warden Cincinnati, OH, USA http://mattwarden.com This email proudly and graciously contributes to entropy.