>>>>If I had 1000 values that I need to loop through (visit every node sequentially, not skip around) that needed very fast processing and they do not need disk storage... which would be faster... an array or a cursor?
>>>
>>>Cursor.
>>>
>>Wow really? I've never done any testing, but I assumed the array would be faster. I suppose a quick test with the coverage profiler would tell us for sure.
>
>Tables are fastest

I am not so sure here -- in the GKK Comparison tools I have an array that is upto a size of laArray[5000,5000]. This is used for the code comparison algorithm. I tried to use a cursor for this to get rid of the 5000 limit (runs out of memory) and to see if the cursor would be faster than the array.

The array version was considerably faster in performance -- the cursor version was far too slow to be of any value.