>>>I've got a method which process 14000 records in a scan loop. On the older machine, the process might take 10 minutes. The new machine takes hours. I've attempted to adjust the paging file memory size, but this hasn't helped.
>>>
>>>In the scan loop, there is a replace which is not optimized which is taking about 3 secords per record on the new machine. I realize that the process needs to be optimized but I'm short of time and I don't have time to do it now.
>>>
>>>Why would there be such a disparity in time?
>>>
>>>The code is identical. The other major change is upgrading from VFP 8 to VFP 9.
>>
>>Is it one record replace or multi-records replace? Also, do you have triggers / rules in the database that are fired along with the replace?
>
>Wow that's the first time I heard the "Reply".wav after someone responded to one of my messages on UT. I think they should've used a deep masculine voice, instead. That really would've blown me away.
>
>No triggers or rules. They are multiple replaces over 8 million records. I know how to optimize this and will when time permits. But I've got to get this and about 30 other methods :) with similar problems completed in a very short time.
>
>And the biggest question is why is it different from machine to machine. Other than the hardware and the upgrade, everything else is identical.

Check if the CPCURRENT() is the same as CPDBF('TableYouUpdate'). That could be the first problem if they are different.

Other than that, it's hard to say what changed after upgrade, so I suggest to bite the bullet and make the needed changes.