>What do you mean the application should be able to work with different databases? .DBC or .DBF?
>
>Regardless, each .DBC and .DBF must have the same structures for all copies of the exe that share them. If the .DBC is copied to the local machines (as the exe should also be copied to the local machine) performance will improve.
>
>Obviously the developer put that loop there because there was or may be some problem opening that SHARED database.
>
>If the DBC was local, and the DBFs shared, there would not be any need for the loop.
>
>Try this:
>
>*Local DBC
>CREATE DATABASE C:\TEST
>*Shared table.
>CREATE TABLE M:\TEST1.DBF (CFIELD1 C(10))
>
>I guarantee you'll be able to access that DBC because it won't be shared.

We have database and tables at the same place, say, T:\IT_Testing\Data\MMVisCollect.DBC + tables or Z:\Data\MMVisCollect.DBC + tables.

Now, how would I know which tables to access? Can I just move DBC files and would all links be resolved automatically?

I'm not yet sure we can change our methodology to work this way, but the idea sounds interesting...