All things being equal, rows, recordsize, result set, etc... I think SQL-Server would be as fast and in some cases faster than VFP. I don't think in any case, as long as all things remain equal, SQL-Server could be THAT much slower. And, if that were the case, with VFP being slightly slower, look at what I get in return for that small time differential...

I think on balance, SQL works much better in a distributed environment...

>John,
>
>>Tell you what, get on a WAN, with a 500,000 - 1,000,000 row table. Run a query in VFP and run the same thing with SQL. Then tell me which one is faster....
>
>This also depends on the situation. In the case where the resultset is bigger than the sum of the size of the used tables, VFP might be the winner. Of course these cases are not so common.
>
>Walter,