General information
Category:
Databases,Tables, Views, Indexing and SQL syntax
No! No! No!
Sorry to be so emphatic, David, but I do want to be clear here.
I am not aware of anything at all about differences in INDEXES between FP and VFP!!!
What I was suggesting to Evan was to keep at it because I don't think that 6-7 seconds is reasonable at all in the example he cites. I feel that there is something amiss for sure, but at a loss to explain (given especially the info available).
Jim N
>>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).
>
>are you saying indexes in 2.6 are not as good as indexes in 3,5,6 and later
>(in terms of speed of access using SEEK on an indexed field) ?
>
>i use 2 gig look up tables and i am trying to convince my boss to redo
>all of our old apps in VFP ... right now we keep them in the old dbf format
>
>any info is appreciated,
>DAve.
>
>>
>>I would still say that something is amiss, though I am at a loss as to exactly what.
>>
>>Good luck,
>>
Previous
Next
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only