>SNIP
>>>
>>>Given especially #2 above I believe that any .CDX that regularly has lots of INSERTION activity AND a TAG primarily used in the application that has a wide range in those INSERTIONS will benefit from regular reindexing. Such reindexing will result in a smaller .CDX with the need for fewer reads necessary to access all pertinent index records.
>>
>>You're addressing the speed issue now. I guess that tests could verify/falsify your hypothesis. My hypothesis is that there will be no significant gain in speed.
>
>That may well be the case with today's hardware having super-fast average access times and large on-board cache. But I would still opt for smaller and more 'consolidate' being faster, even if now it is limited more to the theoretical than the practical. I do think that this would be quite difficult to benchmark accurately with today's premium hardware, though the point might be better confirmed using, say a PII 90mhz and an old 1gig HD.
>>
>>And how about the other IMO false perception, correctness?
>
>If it's faster it is more "correct" as I see it. If its smaller it's more "correct" as I see it.
>So I would say that corectness is TRUE, not false.
>
>UPDATE: I just re-read your original, and in the context of VFP7SP1 I wouldn't bother with reindexing either. But in all other releases, I would.

OOPS. I just reacted on your initial reply. :)

>cheers
>
>>
>>>cheers
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>SNIP