Tom,

I would agree that a better Server is a good start.

But I am not so sure that a Win95 Peer-to-Peer is going to offer all that much performance improvement, even with 64 or 128 megs. I have no direct experience with such, but just have this intuition that all of the code in Netware or NT which goes towards buffering and management of such simply is absent in good ol Win95.

I, of course, have been all wet before on issues like this.

Cheers,
Jim N.
>>>>
>>>>Your server is kind of under powered. But I think it is more your network. Make sure your network is setup correctly? Are you using 10/2 or 10/T connections?
>>>>
>>>>Tom
>>>
>>>It's an Ithernet 10-based T network which is set up by our university network specialists. All PC's accessing our server are on the same physical wire and connected to the same Hub. I should also mention that aside from one exception, the interactive (data entry) response time across the network seems to be fine. The most noticeable difference was the query I tried across the network. The query is joining two tables and accessing a database of approximately 180,000 records.
>>
>>That is going to take time on just about any machine or environment if the joined tables are of any size. The best thing to do is make sure that you have a local hard disk and set up your temp dir "TMPFILES = C:" in your config.fp file. Please note that I found that the TMPFILES in FP2.6 only looks at the drive letter. Your temp files will be created on the currently selected directory on that drive. If you want your temp files to go into c:\temp then be sure that you cd c:\temp before starting your app.
>>
>> I
>
>
>Good points. Also, you really need to beef up the server. I suggest at least 32 Megs of RAM instead of 16. I would guess you would have between a 25 & 50 % speed increase if you do. Rule of thumb: You never have enough RAM. (s)
>
>Also make sure you have a newer drive like the WD 1.6 gig or larger. These drives have a much better data throughput then 1.2 or less.
>
>I guess what I am getting at is you really need a better server.
>
>Tom