Hi,
TS will always be faster than access via the network, especially if you use SUBST to point to the data, as it takes the redirector out of the equation. i.e. the Database engine has access to the full bus bandwith of the server for access, where as the local workstations have something less than 70Mb/sec/No. Workstations accessing at that time, under high load this can be lower than 5Mb/Sec.

Mapping a drive to the dataset on the TS will have measureable performance degradation.

UPDATED: A 1Gb link from the Switch to the server does reduce to server bottleneck somewhat.

Also where does the exe reside on the client or the server.

>We have a location with 7 workstations which use a local lan (100mb) to access VFP tables. The same app and tables are accessed via Terminal Services from a remote location by 8 workstations. The data resides ON the Terminal Server. The workstations connecting through terminal services are fast - there is no delay. However, on the workstations connected locally directly through a switch, there is a delay when stepping through records. It almost appears to be a slow screen draw or something. There is sometimes a 2-3 second delay stepping through the records before the screen draw is done. yet there is no delay at all from the remote site using terminal server even with all users on at the same time. Any ideas? The speed difference appears to be reversed. I think I am forgetting a setting in the Windows 2003 Terminal Server for priority or something??? All workstations at both sites are 100mbs windows xp and a fast switch. The local workstations should be faster than the
>terminal server clients or at least not exhibit this strange delay. Pulling records in queries does not appear to be slower though which is why I am wondering about the video/screen refresh issue maybe? The workstations are fairly new windows xp systems.
>
>I am reviewing this now:
>
>http://www.msterminalservices.org/articles/Bandwidth-Management-Part1.html