>Ed, (BTW, nice to talk to you again)
>
>I had a very specific experience with this with VFP 3 and AFAIK, 5 and 6 haven't changed the way views are implemented.
>
>I'm confused that you said local-view, instead of remote view. What is a local view for a table on a data server?
>
>My experience was exactly as John had indicated. We had a number of queries bouncing off a table with 40K records. Using remote views, it took upwards of 8 minutes to grab a handful of records, whereas using SQLEXEC to run the query on the server it took seconds... or less.
>
>Am I missing something?

What back-end do you have? If you run remote view against e.g. SQL-Server, then it's really strange to expect that VFP will download whole SQL-table to client. It's just not realistic. Remote view is the same thing as SQLExec with Select statement inside, but in another wrapper, nothing more. It's true, that calling stored procedure through SQLExec is faster (because SQL procedure is pre-compiled), but the difference is negligible in many cases, and again it's not about downloading whole tables.
It seems to me that some misunderstanding persistss here. When you run remote view you really have client-server, and when you use local view you have file server, and nobody never moved whole tables. The good way (not the only one :) to do this would be COPY FILE command :-).

I'm also glad to see you again on UT, and I remember how we discuss things in VFP3 days.