Slow
Not hardly,
My tests showed that on a first search, the speeed of a native dbf to a mysql server was about 3 seconds for the dbf and .75 of a second for the same search using mysql.
After a few searches both dbf and mysql came out about the same (I assume thats becuase vfp caches the index files and speeds up after time)

The major difference in how you have to start to think client server, instead of file server. For instance if you have a table with 25K records, in native vfp thinking you wouldnt think twich about a command like
use mytable in 0 (which opens it in the local machine)
but when using Mysql, you wouldnt do that, even with a remote view. This could get very slow, moving the entire database down to the local machine. So every querry, has to be thought out, on how many records you are actually getting, The fewer the records the better. Most often, if you need say averages on a table of sql data, or sum/s or calculated values, use the power of the server to do the calculations for you, and just get the results back into vfp, where you display, or report on them.

Once you get started thinking in terms of programming with a server, letting the server do the work for you, you should notice speed increases over and above what you are used to using native VFP tables.

The querries can be as complex as you want (just as long as the server does them) Keep your result sets low. and buckle up, Client Server properly configured blows VFP tables out of the water.
Your mileage may vary.... Thats my experience.

Bob Lee






>I found MySQL+Foxpro worked well.
>But somebody said their running speed got slow. Do you think the running speed is slow?
>
>Ricky