Hi Tore

I copied my table using the following

COPY TO invcust2 DATABASE wots WITH CDX

I then created a view on the new table that was exactly the same as my initial view. Unfortunately, I get the same result, partial optimization.

Not sure where to go from here.

Regards
Geoff Scott

>I don't use databases, only free tables, so in my case it was easy. I tried some equal SELECT statements in VFP8 and VFP9, and noticed where I found difference in optimizing level. Then I tried the COPY TO xx WITH CDX command on those tables, you can probably accomplish the sae with a COPY TO xx, ZAP and APPEND FROM xx.
>
>>Hi Tore
>>
>>Does that mean that I should do a COPY TO xx WITH CDX for each table in the database???
>>
>>Regards
>>Geoff Scott
>>
>>>Hi Geoff, this is the answer I received from Aleksey Tsingauz at Microsoft, and which solved my problem (in addition to rebuilding the indexes via a series of COPY TO xx WITH CDX):
>>>
>>>Hi Tore,
>>>
>>>Check CPCURRENT() and CPDBF(). If they don't match, VFP9 won't use indexes on character expressions for optimization.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Aleksey.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hey Sergey
>>>>
>>>>Did this get resolved? I have just discovered that all my views are taking about twice as long as in VFP7.
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Geoff Scott
>>>>
>>>>>Tore,
>>>>>
>>>>>I still think it has something to do with SET COLLATE but I could be mistaken.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I did some more testing, and it seems like I may have had some table corruption. I reindexed the table, and the results were as before, meaning slow on VFP9, instant on VFP8. But after I did a series of COPY TO newfile WITH CDX, first to a temp file, and then from the temp file to overwrite the original file, everything is fine..! I am convinced I did the exactly same thing yesterday!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thank you anyway for the tips. I will do some more testing later this afternoon/night, I will send you a private email with some sample data if the problem reappears.
>>>>>>