>Hi All,
>
>I've been running some test of VFP 6.0 on different workstations/servers. Using the Coverage Profiler the speed difference running a simple SQL statement on my NT 4.0 workstation and running the same SQL statement against the same file on an NT 4.0 server is: Server 3.5 sec. and workstation 8.7 sec.
>
>The time is about the same whether I run the SQL against data on the server on a local drive when I run from the workstation. The greater significance is the the server has a 2.33 mhz chip and the workstation has a 4.5 mhz chip. The other factor is that the Server is SCSI and the Workstation is IDE. But that doesn't seem to account for the difference since the time to run the same SQL against the same data on a Win 98 workstation with a 2.33 mhz chip and using VFP 5.0 is 3.7 sec.
>
>It would appear that it might be something in the NT 4.0 workstation setup or configuration or maybe VFP 6.0 set or configuration. I'm sure that I'm not the only one to encounter this. Can anyone shed some light on this situation? I did a search on VFP timmings etc. and I didn't find anything. TIA.
>
>Regards,
>
>Paige


Time differences can vary depending on a number of things. Amount of physical RAM, size of swap file, etc all come into play.

As for the slower SQL times in 6.0, I've seen this. In all cases I've seen the solution has been to rewrite the SQL statement to combine the tables using JOINs instead of the WHERE.