Jim:

Thanks for your response. You suggestion is a good one. We have considered putting some of the calculation time at the front of the process (when the user enters certain info).

A colleague has suggested that the main difference between Foxpro and C is that Foxpro uses more disk access time in finding data first in the index file and then in actual tables while this time is reduced in C when the data is accessed via pointers directly to the data file (pointers are in RAM instead of on disk in an index file).

Peter.

>Hi Joseph,
>
>Given the miniscule information you have provided, and *ASSUMING* that you are correct in your assertion that you have Rushmore'd it all very well, then I would guess that the competitor is keeping some "running totals" which can be presented quickly while your app. is going out and calculating those totals fresh each time.
>
>I know that I have had rare occasions to keep/use records or tables storing "running totals" and they can just be "popped up" for common and frequent requests, amking things zippy indeed.
>
>Just one idea.
>
>good luck,
>Jim N
>
>>Hello !
>>
>>We have developed a VFP5 program called the Factory Commander that gathers data about a manufacturing process and produces reports indicating production results.
>>
>>The calculation phase of this program takes about ten times longer than our competitors who use C and Smalltalk. We have about 15 related tables and use SCAN/SEEK and SQL Selects to process the data and I believe we are maximizing the Rushmore technology.
>>
>>Any ideas on why our competitors are beating us using a 'database from scratch' in C ?