Thanks David

I did, some time ago read something about the deleted() indexes and decided to give them a wide berth.

I am looking (in the interim) at using an ODBC connection to access the view remotely but am not sure, at this stage whether that will resolve much of the problem. Any advice you might have on this would be much appreciated.

Is it because I was using ODBC that my view lost its buffering???

Also, People seem to be talking about VFP8 as though it has been released, have I missed something???

Geoff

>Geoff,
>
>>Thanks for replying. None of my indexes include deleted().
>
>I meant an index on just deleted() ie index on deleted() tag deleted which was the "standard" thing to do to help optimize local table SQL performance. It can actually slowdown performance across the network. There's a Wiki article that goes into all the gory details.
>
>>When you say backend database, are you saying that using remote views will not increase performance??? Is it really necessary to go to something like SQL Server???
>
>>Also, while I was trying to get a remote view working I discovered that the remote view was not buffered. What is the best way to buffer a remote view???
>
>remote view = view against a SQL backend
>local view = view against a VFP table
>
>So remote views only pertain to a backend server, like SQLServer, Sybase or Oracle.
>
>A local view is still forcing the client machine to figure out what records need to be retrieved, to do this parts of the CDX and table itself may be dragged down the wire. That wire is at least 2-3 orders of magnitude slower than local disk access speed.
>
>Remote views, let the server figure out the record subset using it's CPU and disk access, then only the result set is send across the wire.