Matt wrote: > This is only faster when you have a large number of rows returned. If I recall > correctly, it was something like 250 rows. I do believe you're mistaken there, Matt. http://www.learnasp.com/advice/whygetrows.asp <quote> "Does it matter for small amounts of data? YES!!!!!!!! My site has SQLserver scripts that run like lightning. I once needed to fill a 9 item listbox from Access and got 90 sec script timeouts with movenext. Getstring never timed out. So in a real production situation it makes weak databases feasible and of course reduces the load on more industrial back-ends so maybe the SQLserver doesn't need as many indexes or RAM upgrades." </quote> Looping through an array is faster than looping through a recordset. If nothing else, it allows you to close the connection faster, which makes it easier on server resources. Norman wrote: > Just a quick amendment to Madhu's comment about seperating ASP and HTML into > seperate blocks and using response.writes. My understanding is that > mutliple calls to the response object slows things down as well. It's best > to build the entire page as a string, and then response.write it all with > just the one call. Would I be correct in assuming this? Yes Norman, you're right. The trade-off is in readability. If I'm trying to debug a script, I find it useful to step through each Response.Write statement to see where I'm making a mistake. Your mileage may vary. Basically, my options boil down to these: 1) [Lots of HTML here] <td>Field Name: <%=RsDetails("FieldName")%> </td> Very readable, but slower. 2) [Lots of Response.Write statements here] Response.Write "<td>Field Name: " & RsDetails("FieldName") & "</td>" Sorta middle ground. I can still make out lines clearly. Not as readable as no. 1 but mildly faster. 3) strHTML = "[Lots of continuous concatenations of HTML here]" & "<td>Field Name: " & RsDetails("FieldName") & "</td>" Response.Write strHTML Not very readable (IMHO), but fast. Again, your mileage may vary. This is just my comfort level. Don't flame me ;) sgd had given a tip a long time ago on thelist about replacing your Response.Write statements with a call to a function called R (or p) that takes a string as a parameter and just does a Response.Write of it. Good tip, IMO. Makes code a good bit more readable. If you're an old Basic fan, call the function Print ;) Cheers, Madhu <<< * >>> Madhu Menon Head - User Experience Group Trisoft Systems Pvt. Ltd. Global Software Services Work: http://www.trisoft.net Personal: http://madman.weblogs.com (Don't look at me. I didn't add the disclaimer. Damn it! Martin B has one too ;) ------------------------DISCLAIMER--------------------------. The contents of this E-mail (including the contents of the enclosure/(s) or attachment/(s) if any) are privileged and confidential material of Trisoft Systems Private Limited and should not be disclosed to, used by or copied in any manner by anyone other than the intended addressee/(s). If this E-mail (including the enclosure/(s) or attachment/(s)if any ) has been received in error, please advise the sender immediately and delete it from your system. The views expressed in this E-mail message (including the enclosure/(s)or attachment/(s) if any) are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of Trisoft Systems Private Limited.