>Now hold on a sec... I think my test, while not scientific, reflects reality. Most people, when they run a SQL, return a result set. This thing about creating an external text file, well, is not what most folks do. And, SQL Server does not do that itself. Rather, it would rely on a client who gets the result set to do this....


Clearly, you don't get the point. O.K. another example: if I want to run a report out of this, I don't have to put it in a cursor. I can use the data right away. There is no need to copy the data into a cursor. One performance gain is that the reports prints right away after I set the DE, the other is that won't lose much time evaluating the relations during spooling, So not only a user gets direct reponse when hitting the print report button, but it also finishes sooner than using a SQL generated cursor.

>As for using a network, no, I did it on my little hold P-400 Notebook running Windows 2000 with 384 mb of RAM...<bg>....And no, I did not reboot my machine between each run... Who cares, I did the same thing FOR BOTH SCENARIOS.

You need to reboot the machine because after each SQL-command VFP stores information about the query on OS level. Running it a second time produces unreliable results comparing it to the real world when using tables in a multi-user environment.

>As for not using the SQL Insert, the point was to use only X-Base constructs. If I used a SQL construct in the X-base stuff, would that not pollute the test environment??????

Since this whole wish is based on the SQL-select command, and don't have any arguments about the SQL-insert command, I would not object. You could also use a COPY TO FIELDS ... FOR command wich is probably a lot faster (for larger resultsets anyway).

>The fact is, your theory got blown out of the water, quite handily I might add.....<bg>.

John, don't act stupid, I know you're more intelligent than that.

>Look, many times the X-base constructs are better than VFP SQL. Tell you what, how about this, doing this in SQL....

>Scenario 1: Running the following SQL Select in Query Analyzer -
>
>SELECT [order details].orderid,shipname,productname,firstname,lastname
> FROM Orders
> INNER JOIN [order details] ON orders.orderid=[order details].orderid
> INNER JOIN Products ON [order details].productid = products.Productid
> INNER JOIN Employees ON orders.employeeid=employees.employeeid
> Where [order details].orderid = 11077
>
>This produces the exact result set as the VFP stuff:
>Time to excute: 0:00:00, it did'nt even register on the clock.

I don't know the config of your hardware, nor do I know other circumstances of your test. Is it the first time you execute the query or was it a second time ?
Did you try the xBase eqiuvalent ? Your test isn't saying me anything.

IMO it is that you don't WANT to see the theoretical benefits, and try to convince me (or moreover others) that your practical approach is supporting your standpoint. Wake up john, important projects are build up out of the both of the two. I won't doubt your practical knowledge, but your theoretical side seems to be far from your practical level. I'll suggest to deepen yourself into the relational model by reading books from either CODD or DATE.


Walter,