>>>There will be a lot of records generated. If I use VFP 5.0
>>>through ODBC as the Database, will the VFP engine be used
>>>with its Rushmore Technology and blazing speed? If I use Access
>>>as the backend, will I be burdoned with its lack of speed when
>>>records grow? Or does ASP have its own engine for record
>>>processing.
>
>>I am under the impression that speed when using ODBC
>>is the same between Access & VFP tables. (Please correct
>>me if I am wrong.)
>
>Access is slow. Access ODBC is slow. (Although the JET Engine found in Access, if manipulated from Visual Basic using DAO is not bad at all!).
>
>Native Visual FoxPro is very, very fast. VFP ODBC driver, compared to other ODBC drivers (ahem...Access), is very very fast and it will make use of Rushmore just the same. My experience, and that of colleagues, is that the VFP ODBC driver is *AMAZING* and that you should forget the 'ODBC' is slow rumour, cause that's not really true.
>
>ASP uses ADO - ActiveX data objects. However, it connects via OLE DB & ODBC. Therefore it does not have a separe data-engine as such and relies on ODBC drivers to do the work.
>
>>The major advantage of using VFP tables is that the
>>tables are not located within the DBC while Access
>>tables are located within the MDB.
>>Thus when the database container becomes corrupted,
>>VFP tables are recoverable while Access tables
>>can be permanantly corrupted. (Get your last backup.)
>
>That's a negative point of view. Corruption of the .DBC (where long table/field names, etc are held) will/could cause problems accessing data in .DBF tables, just as damage to the MDB will cause problems. Therefore, while you will almost certainly be able to access/repair the .DBF if something happens to the .DBC, it's not something to get smug about.
>
>Make sure you use the latest VFP ODBC driver.
>
>-Alastair

Hi Alastair,
I have a database in VFP 5.0 which has two tables. One table has about 57,000 records and the other one has 1.5 million records. After reading this thread from you, I imported the tables into Access 97. They are now native access tables. In Access & VFP 5.0, there are two index tags on the 1.5 million table, BRANCH and ITEM_ID. the following SQL was run in both VFP and Access:

SELECT ITEM_ID, SUM(QTY * RATE) AS AMOUNT FROM SALES;
WHERE BRANCH = '01';
GROUP BY ITEM_ID

It took VFP 2min 35sec to do it, Access took 2min 10 sec. This was on a 200 MMX machine with 64MB RAM.

Then I put the same SQL in FrontPage 98 on two different pages. One had Access as the data source and the other had VFP 5.0 as the data source. The results were similar.

How is Access slower? I even tried a query on a non indexed field and Access was still faster.

Any body throw some light on this?

Regards

Abdul AHad