Thanks for the reply. Changing the '==' to '=' didn't affect the speed much or removing the ORDER BY. It seems that the "join" is causing the problem because reading in another table by itself takes 2-3 seconds for nearly 2000 records.

Rgds
Petras


>Hi Petras.
>
>Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
>I always thought using "==" for comparison caused the SQL SELECT to take longer?? Will just using "=" work for your situation?
>
>The ORDER BY clause may add some time looking at the size of your result set.
>
>Also Browsing table(s) can seem faster since only the viewed records are retreived. Then as you page down the others are retreived.
>
>-Michael M. Emmons
>
>>Hi, the following VFP 5.0a program takes on average 20 secs to read under 500 records. The files are on a SCO Unix server with the "samba" network agent connected to Win95 PC's over a 10MB network connection. A VFP "browse" for the same files and fields is almost instantaneous.
>>------------------------------------------------------
>>USE "\\unix\disk1\maindata\crd\crdmst.dbf" IN 0 SHARED
>>USE "\\unix\disk1\maindata\z\zdna.dbf" IN 0 SHARED
>>
>>nTIME=DATETIME()
>>
>>SELECT crdmst.name, ;
>>ALLTRIM(pstl_adr_1)+','+ALLTRIM(pstl_adr_2) as address, ;
>>ALLTRIM(pstl_city)+','+ALLTRIM(pstl_state)+pstl_pcode as city, ;
>>balance,creditor FROM crdmst,zdna INTO CURSOR cdm NOCONSOLE ;
>>WHERE crdmst.creditor == zdna.code ORDER BY 1
>>
>>=MESSAGEBOX("Time:"+STR(DATETIME()-nTIME)+" Seconds")
>>
>>CLOSE TABLES
>>------------------------------------------------------
>>Any help would be deeply appreciated. I'd hate to contemplate VC/VB or Delphi.
>>
>>Rgds
>>Petras