>Hi,
>I was just stating my findings, it would appear that the "==" is evaluated on each iteration, whereas the SET EXACT & SET ANSI are not.
>
>Do some tests yourself, create a dbf with 15mil + records and a number of keys, create several keys based on integer, character & binary fields and see what your findings are. Conservatively it gives a 10% difference in timings, remember to reboot the workstation between tests to get reliable results.

Well as Jim Booth points out == is not the same as SET EXACT, there is the issue of comparing apples to apples. It's your claim, demonstrate it. You've already written the code.

>
>>>Hi,
>>>I have recently done some performance testing on large datasets in VFP9, as result we are now using SET EXACT ON & SET ANSI ON and not using "==" as it does have a perceivable impact on performance when processing large amounts of data.
>>
>>When a scientist wants to make such a claim in a journal they must provide evidence and practices which others can duplicate. Are we not doing computer science? IOW would you please prove that?
>>
>>>
>>>>Good Friday Morning to All,
>>>>
>>>>I ran into a problem using <> operator where the following happens:
>>>>

>>>>cTest1 = "This is a sample string"
>>>>cTest2 = "This is a sample string test"
>>>>? cTest2 <> cTest1  && returns .F.
>>>>

>>>>
>>>>Now I am thinking if I should do away with using <> operator because it always relies on SET EXACT ON and just use "==" in ALL my comparisons. What do you think?
>>>>
>>>>Thank you.