>I was a little disappointed when we went from 10Mbps to 100Mbps. We noticed some improvement, but not a lot...
>
>Joe
>
>>>We have a VFP application running on NT LAN. Sometimes it's slow, especially while working with big tables.
>>>How large are changes necessary for migration to C/S technology with
>>>SQL-server ?
>>>TIA
>>If you mean that you have the VFP files on a shared folder ( directory) on an NT server, you might consider optimizing your NT server environment. Specifically, the biggest hit could be: Fragmentation of NTFS partitions. There are several programs available from non-MS sources that address this fragmentation problem: Symantec's Norton Utilities, and Executive Software's Diskkeeper. We use Diskkeeper -- latest version will even defragment NT directories! Other considerations, include what else you are running on the NT server itself -- are you treating it like another workstation and just a repository for your VFP data as well, you may not be happy with the attention that NT pays to its own local keyboard and display. Several of our sites have upgraded the LAN hardware from 10 base T to 100 base T with some, but not staggering performance improvement. I can't take the time or space to indicate all the reasons you may not be satisfied with the performance you are experiencing on
>>NT, but without even knowing what you are trying to do the forementioned steps have helped us.
My best guess on our mutual disappointment in what on the surface would be an order-of-magnitude jump in performance is that the actual data transferred from the server to the work station is so small ( relatively speaking ) that the difference between 5 ms for a 16K I/O at 10-base T, is not apparently different from .5 ms on a 100 base T. We have seen far fewer packet collisions with 100 base T, and don't recall any "storms" since the 100 base T has been in use. Bottom line, the 100 base T may not speed up an individual transaction, but improves the overall throughput of the LAN.