Hi Randy,

Can't say for Server 2003, but for WinXP:

Control panel\System\Hardware\Device manager.
Expand "Disk Drives" and d-click on each drive line.
- Some drives will have a "Disk properties" tab and it's on there.
- Some drives have a "SCSI properties" tab and for me "Disable synchronous transfers" seems to have done the trick.

cheers

>We had this error only twice in the last year and only on 1 workstation that still had pre SP1 on it. We rolled out Sp1 this morning on all workstations and right away one workstation got the error within about 10 minutes. I've rolled back to pre SP1 on this workstation for now, but we need to find a way to move forward because we're wanting to implement XFRX 12 and it seems to like Sp1 better. For what it's worth, this is only affecting 1 client.
>
>Oh yeah, and this is all SQL server remote views, no local VFP data whatsoever. But the error occurs on the END TRANSACTION of the VFP transaction that wraps everything.
>
>We have 2 other clients that have never seen the error under Sp1 or previous VFP versions for that matter. The apps are different, but they all share the same framework code (VFE) in the data tier and the error is always occurring down in those classes when it happens. We've never been able to reproduce in development. The situation that it can be made to happen in seems to be when a user has done multiple (3, 4...10?) tableupdates on the same view (ie. form not closed between saves)
>
>We've only been able to reproduce the problem within a COM server DLL under sp1 that runs inside a C# service - going back to pre-SP1 fixed the COM server, which is an acceptable solution for that implementation, I suppose. But the desktops really need to all be on Sp1.
>
>I'm starting to think hardware, at least when running the desktop/gui - the COM server may be another issue. I think I'm going to check that 'write behind cache' thing - where do I look for that in XP and/or Windows 2003 server?
>
>This is VERY disconcerting. I've emailed Microsoft a couple times but have not heard anything back. Perhaps they just don't care to deal with it.
>
>Thanks for reading my rambling message...