>>>>It's invalid query because "MyTable.MyField" isn't either aggregate function nor it's included in the GROUP BY.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I changed the SQL Select, making Group By "1,2" (instead of just 2) and it works now.
>>>

But it is different.

>>
>>Than you can change

having not empty(&lcExpr)
>>* to
>>WHERE not empty(&lcExpr)
>>

>
>I think you are saying that by changing from Having to Where, the SQL Select will run faster, right? Why, then, the original programmer didn't use Where in the first place? That is, I am concerned that there might be another reason he had "Having" instead of Where and I don't want to break it. Unless you think he was just drinking tequila when writing this code <g>