>
>I see. Well, if you say so, it must be true.
>
>In which case you needn't look at
>
>http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~Client/ServerTechniquesPerformance~VFP

Yes..... do you really think this backs up your point?

>>>All I need to do is provide one example where this statement is proved incorrect. Shall I do that?<<
>
>Of course you should. If you have something involving measurements with code that we can reproduce for ourselves, I'm surprised you haven't already posted it.
>
>In fact, since you're offering, why not put it on the Wiki for everybody, and just post the address here?
>

You are like many programmers - you over-complicate the issue. Here, I will alieve the burden of thinking on your part...< s >...

Fabricate a recordset with 10 records, spin through it and mung data. Do the same thing with a VFP cursor. I bet there won't be any difference. And finally, create a SQL stored proc that creates a cursor, does the same task and returns the result set. I bet the performance will not be noticebly different.

I have done all the testing I need to do in the real world champ... Hey, if VFP were that superior, the rest of the world would be using it.... < bg >.... Face it, the rest of the world caught up. And in the not too distant future, VFP is going to get lapped...< bg >...

FWIW, posting statistics is loaded with problems... First off, unless you have the EXACT setup and conditions, it is not a valid test. Benchmarking is a serious business. The time to retrieve the same 91 records 500x does not a benchmark make. The whole idea is to simulate reality.