>If the cursor only has 90 records, the LOCATE should not be taking that long, optimized or not. Have you stepped through the code to make sure that your LOCATE statement is what is taking so much time? I know stepping through the code is a daunting task with codebook, but it should point out what is really taking so mush time. you could also run the code through the coverage logger and check out the listing to see what routines are stalling everything up. To summarize, it doesn't sound to me like an optimization issue.


That's what I thought about LOCATE. I'm running the coverage logger right now. Hopefully I'll find out what's happening (besides the network issue - see other responses). Thanks