>>>>If I were writing this thing from scratch, I'd do as you suggest, but unfortunately, with only God knows how many lines of code existing in this app, I don't have that luxury. Do you think it's safe to count on tricking VFP the way I'm doing it?
>>>
>>>No, it's not safe. Your results are not reliable.
>>
>>You know... I was afraid you'd say that. ;)
>>
>>For the record though, by 'not reliable', do you mean from run to run, or for future reference. So far, it's been completely reliable in my testing, but I don't know what MS might do later to screw it up for me and so far, I'm at a loss to find another way to speed this thing up. The way it is now, it's just waaaayyy too slow. Doing what I did took it down to sub 1 second. Well, I'm going to keep rummaging around for an answer, but in the meantime, I may have to treat this as a temporary fix.
>>
>You can not expect the same result in every test on every PC. How many tables do you use in your SELECT? Can you post it again because I jumped into the thread in the middle?
>
>Did you add NOFILTER clause at the end? Did it speed up the process? How many records are in the table and how many satisfy the filter criteria?

I suspect he's getting the equivalent of a SET FILTER. So there really is no data being transferred as would be the case with the NOFILTER. It's probably faster than with the NOFILTER.