Hi Evan,

This at leasts suggests strongly that it is not the network.

The users I've had would never put up with 6-7 seconds for the type of example you give, and this even against a near 2-gig table with over 1.3 million records and a whole lot of indexes defined (though it was in 2.6).

I would still say that something is amiss, though I am at a loss as to exactly what.

Good luck,

Jim N

>>I see from later dialogue that you are ready to accept this as 'normal'.
>>I would say that you should be able to get better myself, and by much too.
>>Does a BROWSE take as long when you have set the index to bed and opened the BROWSE with the Key option (for your example below)?
>>I suppose that RAM could be implicated here -large indices may not be able to be efficiently loaded?
>
>The browse take 6 to 7 seconds (even with the method above). I have 64megs of RAM on a PII.
>
>Interesting note is that if I set a relation between this large table and a parent table and then choose record in the parent table... the child records are displayed instantaneously. This means that relations between tables are implemented are a more fundamental level than a SQL statement. Perhaps I can harness this concept in my query...