>>No, in this case order doesn't make any difference. Foxro will rearange them anyway the way it thinks will be optimal.
>>
>
>This is good and bad. On one hand I thought I would have some control over the speed of execution. On the other hand, they can't blame me <g>. But the bottom line, I guess, is by adding two more fields in the WHERE expression, I should improve overall speed of execution, right?

I would expect it to be faster if additional condition limit the # of record returned. I would run query with SYS(3054,11) to see what indexes it uses.