Yeah, but "dropping indexes" is a tough decision when you have users who are

used to dynamically sorting records in a list by every header that appears.

I will definitely test removing the deleted() flag. According to the

articles, this will kill my main query builder because it does the

following:

1. Asks the user for the criteria

2. Counts the records that meet the entered criteria.

3. Display the criteria (if the user selects view results).

The performance is OK but I am always trying to improve it. I am also not

working with the best network in the world. I was just wondering if there

was a way that I could easily use the benefits of Rushmore without its

drawbacks.

-----Original Message-----

From: Chuck Urwiler [mailto:chuck@eps-software.com]

Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 10:03 AM

To: Multiple recipients of ProFox

Subject: RE: VFP6: Rushmore/Network Performance

Clark,

I'm not certain, but I would think the only good reason to turn off

Rushmore optimization is if you are working with really large tables and

writing complex queries against them. I say this because one of the

features of Rushmore is to build an in-memory bitmap of matching

records. I could see on large tables where the bitmap(s) would require

too much memory, requiring VFP to do lots of extra work just to make

room for the bitmaps.

Another idea that comes to mind is if you have non-discriminating

indexes. In this case, Rushmore would choose to use the indexes but they

would be more of a burden than a help. However, a better choice would be

to drop these indexes instead.

Just ideas from the top of my head. I've never seen a reason to turn it

off in my experience.

-Chuck Urwiler, MCT, MCSD, MCDBA

http://www.eps-software.com

-----Original Message-----

From: White, Clark [mailto:WhiteC@jsc.mil]

Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 9:23 AM

To: Multiple recipients of ProFox

Subject: VFP6: Rushmore/Network Performance

I have found a lot of interesting information on removing the deleted()

index tags to improve performance on a network.

Has anyone on the list ever tried using the NOOPTIMIZE clause to turn

Rushmore off to increase performance? If so, does this help at all?

Clark