>This is not good news. I keep hearing all this talk about how XML is so great and now I find out it's dog slow. Looks like I have a lot of rewriting to do. :(
>
>Thanks,
>
>Michelle
>


XML is not 'slow', and stating that it is 'poorly implemented' in VFP is being narrow minded.

XML is simply not designed for the quick transfer of data of the proportion you are using. If you try to move a dumptruck-load of sand using your briefcase, it's going to take you a while. Your briefcase, however, is much better suited at carrying business papers than a dumptruck.

XML by it's very nature is bloated, and parsing it using XMLDOM (as VFP does internally) requires loading every node into memory. There are faster ways of parsing XML (read: SAX), but you have to write special code to do it, and it's much more complex. Parsing smaller datasets, is for most purposes practically instantaneous.

For a recordset of the size you're describing, you'd be better off passing a filename around and letting each process access the file directly...

>
>

---

>>
>>No XML is not really implemented well in VFP for large data sets. 100, no problem. 5000, I'd think of an FTP solution.
>>
>>__Stephen