ZZartin (9/6/2012)
bens4lsu (9/6/2012)
That seems like a lot of work, when you could modify the original stored procedure to save the multiple result sets to a temp table and then return them all as one result set. Of course, there might be a reason that you can't update the procedure, but it seems like that would be the preferable course.I was wondering this too and since the solution requires creating a new stored procedure anyways why not just do it all in the same stored procedure?
In my case - because I had limited access to the database and couldn't modify any legacy code.
As I noted in the article, this procedure can be used for ETL process from poorly designed databases, were we have lots of multiple result set procedures, and we don't want to modify each of them.