No problem, but might be a couple of days until I get to it

Bob

>Robert,
>
>I am very interested. If you could dig it out I'd be very grateful.
>
>Lennert
>>I wrote a VFP backend program years ago and it works great. The server piece runs in VFP allowing you to use true VFP SQL syntax including the use of VFP commands not supported by MS SQL as well as VFP user defined functions. As an additional benefit, you can run in the exclusive use mode and do things like have the server time stamp the entered/modified fields.
>>
>>The concept is simple, you send a SQL request (my system used a TCP/IP socket, but better mechanisms are available now) that is put in a queue, when the statement is processed, the results are streamed back to the client. Since this was originally written to support slow links, I sent the fields back as a delimited string (with each field trimmed to conserve bandwidth) and reassembled a cursor on the client side. I even have a mechanism that will resolve local variables/fields since those items won't be known to the server. The client object (class) gets dropped on a form so it is always returned to the correct datasession. This worked well for my purposes but does not support things like transactions/rollbacks and some of the other stuff that SQL Server supports, but could be updated to include more advanced features. It took about a week to write, and has not been documented since it was for my internal consumption.
>>
>>If you are interested I can dig it out and send it to you, but it would be as-is but you could easily modify as needed.
>>
>>Bob
>>
>>>The company I'm working for might be helped if there was something like a VFP database server written in the VFP language with source code available. I know, I know, it is a contradictio in terminis, but this server would only have to proces sequential requests, no concurrenct ones. The company needs some kind of single-user VFP database server.
>>>
>>>If someone ever tried but dit not finish the product, I would also be very interested.
>>>
>>>If I would read this message, I'd think: why not use SQL Server, or Advantage? The answer is: For the specific problem, circumstances and company that wouldn't work out well. I know MS Sql Server and I know what it can and I know what this company would have to do if it would use SQL server as a backend, and it is no option.
>>>
>>>So... anybody having a hint or link?
>>>
>>>TIA
>>>
>>>Lennert