Steve..

In the interest of full disclosure, while I have a vested interest in Dataclas/COM, I have no financial interest in Dataclas/VFP. The only product I push up here is Dataclas/VFP. For the record, I think in the past, I had addressed that very issue up here because somebody else was under the mistaken belief that I owned a part of DataClas/VFP.

Therefore, the charge you level does not have merit.

As far as pushing products is concerned, I have done that for a long time. FoxExpress, FoxAudit, and yes, INTL.

This should close the matter...


>John, please, if you have a pecuniary interest in recommendations you make, you should say so.
>
>Here you are, with an "MVP" in your sig, pushing your own product like that. I think that's ethically borderline, don't you?
>
>**--** Steve
>
>
>>Check the indexes on your backend. If you are using SQL Server, do you have a clustered index? Does your search criteria match an index? And finally, make sure the server hardware is adaquate.
>>
>>Another thing to check: are you minimizing the number of records you need to fetch from the server?
>>
>>Lastly, Go to www.redmatrix.com and check out dataclas. If you find yourself in a situation where you can ditch the RV's, try Dataclas.
>>
>>Good luck!
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>How to speed up a SQL remote view when calling out from VFP ?
>>>I have tried to using the fetch mode. It can return the control
>>>so fast and the program can be opened quickly. But when I issue
>>>tableupdate(.t.) command, it return an error, it is the connection
>>>is busy. I know all records of the table is being fetch at the
>>>background. Thus I can only update the table after the fetch is
>>>completed. And if I interrupt the fetch process, the table can't
>>>be updated. When the table is so large, the fetch time is so long.