>>Yes, it is updating multiple records at a time. Approximately 90,000 records are being changed (I am guessing but will check in a min for sure).
>>
>>UPDATE: about 130,000 records are being changed.
>
>Well, that's really a lot of data written to disk. I would say that the time taken is normal.
>
>When doing batch updates, I normally do a TableUpdate() for each record, and put everything within a transaction, but I am claiming that this method is really better than updating multiple records at once. Actually, updating multiple records might actually save total time. (One reason I use transactions is because quite often, more than one table are involved.)
>
>On the other hand, updating a single record at a time might make it possible to show some sort of progress indicator, or even provide the option of interrupting. (In the case of an interruption, you may want to do a ROLLBACK, if it is important to avoid partially-saved data.)

As long as you say it is normal I will accept it. And in my case I was doing TRANSACTION because 3 tables were involved. The problem was that I (and the customer) didn't expect so much time and didn't expect the Task Manager showing "Not responding". We actually terminated the process a couple of times. Until I took the data, loaded on my PC and tested with messages to determine where was the delay.

I guess there is not much I can do so I will just add a bunch of WAIT WIND messages to let the customer know that something is being done so that he would patiently wait.

Thank you for your help.