>> I believe if you check the documentation, INSERT - SQL does
>> momentarily lock the table header in order to update the record count
>> contained in the header. But you are right, INSERT INTO is much superior to
>> APPEND BLANK.
>
>I reckon that indexes make the difference. Appending a blank record
>writes a blank entry into all the index tags it has, then replacing the
>values replaces the tag values as well, moving them down the binary tree
>and probably causing some block splitting every once in a while.
>Inserting a record puts its tag values right down to where they belong,
>in only one move. I've measured inserting vs appending when first I saw
>a .cdx index, and ratio is about 1 to 2. Never tried without indexes,
>but 1 to 1.4 is my first guess.
>
>BTW, isn't it more proper English to write "indices" instead of
>"indexes"? I mean, we do say "data" and don't say "datums". I did learn
>it some... wow, thirty years ago, and the professor said that English
>keeps Latin plurals.

Hi Dragan,
Webster's dictionary lists both "indices" and "indexes" as plurals of "index". :-)

Bill