>>>Nope. There is no index on it! For me there is no problem, I packed in
>>>and the problem was solved.
>>
>>What can make a table 4 seconds to open with only 78 records?
>
>78K records - 55K = 23K records. still shouldn't take that long, but...

Oops, sorry, I thought it was 78 records instead of 78000. :)

But, yes, you're right. It isn't suppose to be a factor. Might it be the lan setup slowing down the process?