There are many issues to using views, and personally I barely think they're worth it. Josh talks about using them for lookup tables, which I think is the MOST useless example of them (no offense, Josh, I'm sure you have more supporters on this than I). For lookup tables I issue a straight SQL in the Init (or ReQuery if the contents are based on the value of another control).

You _can_ create the view with "no data on load" to lower startup time.

You're right about them not having indexes. What you bring back in a parameterized view is a subset based on one or more pieces of known information. I find this to be very limiting, as any misspelling ('fabioni') will not put you close, it will tell you there is nonesuch.

jt

>Are views as fast as using tables? I have noticed that views try to load all data within a table prior to becoming available to the program (unless you have some sort of filter). This does not seem to be the case when opening a table to view (see) browse. It would appear that directly opening/using tables is better/faster. I've also noted that using tableupdate(1) using a view (using a table without indexes) takes much longer to save than the same save using the tables directly.
>
>Maybe there is somesort of parameter that I'm missing that limits the way views get records? Or some other parameter that will cause views to save faster.
>
>John