>>I read Don's request as he wants the physical prior and next record from the table in addition to the key record.
>
>I'm often telling clients that I believe there is a lack of "historically accurate" thinking in IT. This manifests in a few ways, one of which is "physical record". Prior record was entered before current record. This suggests a need for a datetime stamp.
>
>Then it is a simple matter to get the max(datetime) before current record and the min(datetime) after the current record and to use those datetime stamps to get the records.

Yes, this looks like a much better approach. Ok, I won't speculate any more what exactly Don wanted and let's wait for him.