> 1.2 million records isn't "VERY BIG", just "Pretty Big" and -- unless he's approaching the 2Gb boundary -- shouldn't be hampering him in any way. The speed hit -- not to mention the financial hit -- moving to SQL Server would cost him would would certainly outweigh his "faster in a free table or DBC" question.

1st, the financial hit depends on the # of users, if the # of users is relatively small, then the financial hit isn't bad.

2nd, this is obviously very subjective, but IMO 1.2 million records is big for Fox. SQL Server 7.0 can deal with data of this size and eliminate the need to pack, reindex, restore from backups when the DBF is damaged etc.

> moving to SQL Server would cost him would would certainly outweigh his "faster in a free table or DBC" question.

He's already stated it's something they are considering. It's my guess that he in a better position to make financial decisions for his company than you are. :)