Nando Dessena wrote:

>
>
> HB> ROFL !!
>
> S> That's the desktop database approach
>
> folks, it *is* a desktop application.

Yes it is, but loading a million records into memory just because that
is the size of the table has never made any sense. That is not a good
"desktop" design. We do not know how many records are involved here, but
it looks like a large number.

Lowering the number of page

> buffers to the minimum allowed makes sense to me in this situation,
> since the data is going to be cached by the application anyway.

There is a double hit on the memory with the embedded server, with the
data cached in both the application and server. If memory usage is an
issue, then so is the design.

>
> I assume there are good reasons for this design; otherwise, the
> classic guidelines apply.
>

regards
ian