JP

You made the following offer:

>>>All I need to do is provide one example where this statement is proved incorrect. Shall I do that?<<

Your "proof" seems to consist of a series of assertions that you seem to believe will prove your case.

You then criticise somebody else's work that is completely independent, furnishes full code so we can replicate/check the findings and assess the meaning of it, goes to some trouble to measure fairly, and shows ADO slower where it matters.

QED.

>>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.<<

Well, if you "bet" there will be no difference then it must be true.

But... isn't your "proof" pretty similar to the example you criticise, except that the other author did formal measurements rather than just relying on his beliefs? Have you actually examined the example?

OK, and now onto the slogans:

>>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 >... <<

Ahem. My statement was that ADO is SLOOOOW compared to the dedicated mechanisms in VFP, Delphi and increasingly Java. You have converted that to a straw-man "VFP is superior" scenario so you can disagree rudely with that rather than address the issue.

Fact: NOTHING in your post "proves" that I am wrong, which is what you boasted you could do. You should be ashamed of yourself.

>> 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. <<

So how are you going to "prove" that you are right? By your own standards, you'll need to post statistics that simulate reality and prove your position. But I don't think you can do that. I cannot remember that you have ever, ever done that. You are quick to shoot others down and lecture them about "reality" and "the real world" and belittle them if they do not provide proofs, but you don't seem to apply the same standards to yourself.

John, I do not think I am likely to learn anything useful in this exchange, so I'm happy to leave it there. If you've got some real proofs I'd be grateful to see them, but otherwise this is just a waste of bandwidth IMHO.

Regards

JR