Hi Randy,

I have since figured out what the problem was! If you see my thread#681420
I explain what happened. In short there was a trigger on the table - I thought that the trigger had been disabled - but it wasn't. Now that I know this I may trying to figure out what components of the trigger execute so slowly and how to selectively disable the trigger if it is called from my update statement (since it is not relevant there)

Thanks so much for your generous offer to help!



>While I would fully expect VFP to be faster, your result for SQL Server seems exceptionally bad, seing as how in less time that than I can perform an update on more than double that number of rows and my SQL Server is running on a poor little Pentium-233 (yes, pentium, not PII) with 128MB RAM. This is doing an UPDATE on a remote view - if I execute the same UPDATE in Query Analyzer it runs ever faster. Never as fast as native VFP, but that is to be expected.
> If you post some more details like the table layout, I can try running the exact same procedures you are and compare my times - my systems are MUCH lower power than yours, even my primary workstation is only a P3-500. I'd be curious to see the numbers I get with the same procedures - maybe something to run against one of the stock sample tables or something for a direct benchmark.
>
> Randy
>
>>I am converting an application from vfp local table to sql server. I am not that knowledgeable about sql server performance tuning issues etc.
>>
>>On my pentium 4, 1.7 ghz w/ 512 megs of ram here is a comparison of the same update statement:
>>
>>my table sostrs has the same columns (about 95%) in both vfp and sql
>>sostrs has 86000 rows
>>
>>vfp - ccustno has an index
>>update sostrs set nreserved = 0 where CCUSTNO='ACME'
>>550 rows updated in less than 1/10 of a second
>>
>>sql - index on primary key cuid
>>update sostrs set nreserved = 0 where CCUSTNO='ACME'
>>550 rows updated in 30 seconds (query performed in query analyzer)
>>
>>select * from sostrs where ccustno='ACME'
>>
>>takes 1/20 of a second in vfp and 0.00 in query analyzer
>>
>>
>>Obviously vfp is orders of magnitude faster here. How do I tune my sql database for updating?