Sage 100

And so the questions about SQL begin ... http://community.sagemas.com/t5/Distribution-Manufacturing-and/IM-Delete-Change-Utility-in-v4-50-SQL/m-p/63518#M7491

This is exactly what I DON'T want my customers to be asking because soon they'll be either ex-customers or suing...assuming that there is in fact no performance increase.

I am under the impression that PVX is much faster in transaction processing (such as this) and that SQL's claim to fame was that it kicked ass in report generation. Is this just a MAS truism?

Ok isn't performance implied with SQL? Ever met someone who thought using SQL would be the same or slower? I haven't.

If the reason for moving to SQL is increased performance, they'll be disappointed. So far, I can't tell a big difference in performance between 3.74 and 4.45.

@WayneSchulz - It *is* implied that's why it's important to advise them that the reasons for SQL are not performance related.

utilities like this would need to be rewritten for SQL to take advantage of set based processing rather than record by record processing

Same thing happened with Accpac for SQL was released (back in 2000 or so ...). Performance was actually worse for a few years but the ability to query and use additional tools to access the data was the driver.