>>
>>Um, yes if you want a fair comparison, how can you make a valid comparison when the processes aren't matched?
>
>Processes should match in requirements not on how they do it.

I meant the processes in the code, I could tweak the C# as we are the VFP, what I want to compare is 2 tools doing "exactly" the same thing just to see how they compare, which is why I'm keeping them almost identical in what data they are retrieving.
>
>>>>You really are clutching at straws here, how many time shall we revist this code in order to get it to work how it's supposed to?
>
>This is no different in any language. You shall revisit your code for optimization. Even .NET don't do that magically for you, does it.

Not entirely true, with most apps there is more than 1 way to skin a cat, with VFP there are more than 100 ways IMO.

>>>
>>>Oh and it's now in the way it's supposed to be ! It looked like for 'test only' code.
>>
>>My point was why is it necessary to have such an in-depth knowledge of VFP to get it doing something a little bit faster, when the current implementation fits the bill?
>
>Well to me it looked like a test code. May I ask why are you executing the same SQL over and over in loop if that's your real code.

The SQL is executed each time for a different database, there are 7 locations, these were originally remote, however it was mentioned network traffic would play too much a key part in this, so I setup 7 local databases on a local servre and just accessed them individualy, the SQL is doing the same thing over and over, but for seperate DBF's.

>
>>
>>>
>>>Well with data at your hand you should build better :
>>>

>>>Select Cl_Ref ;
>>>  FROM Client ;
>>>  where Cl_Sname = "LAWRENCE"  And ;
>>>  Pr_Code In (Select Pr_Code From Property) And ;
>>>  Cl_Ref In (Select PKey From FoxGUIDS Where FoxGUIDS.Table = 'Client') ;
>>>  Into Cursor temp nofilter
>>>

>>
>>Going on past experience using IN I'm not keen on it, however, I'll try it by all means.
>>
>
>>I never actually saw you post any results with a small case study.
>
>Oh my. Are you sure you read my msgs in your other thread at all.

No I didn't, I will now though, I've been juggling this place whilst testing these 2 apps.

Kev