Tom,

While the programs do show the elapsed times, I have been ignoring them in favour of the size issues.

I know that many don't like REINDEX, but is is a valid command and it does have its uses. And in fact deleting/recreating TAGS offers no apparent size/time advantage over REINDEX.


>Jim;
>
>Have you tried any benchmarks involving total time to complete a Reindex with large files and using VFP 6 and 7?
>
>Personally, I like to stay away from Reindex and prefer to blow away tags and recreate them.
>
>Tom
>
>>Funny you should suggest this, Doug...
>>
>>After Christof's latest to me I tried what (effectively) you are suggesting.
>>
>>My last run with my big test table was a REINDEX using VFP6, and it had left a .CDX of approx. 44mb.
>>I recompiled the REINDEXing program under VFP7 and ran it against the VFP6-created table/.cdx and the .CDX came out at 88mb.
>>
>>An actual "COPY TO" in the desired order won't, I *think*, prove much else because the table records each have 4 indices where two of the fields were deliberately generated descending and two properly ascending.
>>
>>I do have the time right now, and the inclination, so I'll give it a shot anyway using VFP7SP1. My hunch is that the 16-byte CHAR key will prove more useful here than either of the INT keys.
>>
>>I'll let you know.
>>
>>
SNIP