>>I have several DBF tables where that I designed YEARS ago where I frequently used a lot of N(3) or N(5) field definitions, and somewhere along the way over the years, I started using simple Integer fields, which I kind of like better now, just because it seems more flexible and less rigid. It seems like your always taking a guess and limiting yourself when using N(x) field definitions. For example: using N(3) for an OrderQty field just because you assume no customer will ever order more than 999 copies of your booklet. Who knows, maybe someone will order 1,000 or even 10,000 one day.
>>
>>Now I am hoping to soon Upsize my tables to Sql server, and I'm kind of tempted to just go ahead and switch all the N(3) and N(5) over to Integer fields before I do and just be done with it.
>>
>>Are there any pros or cons to my "old way" vs. my new plan to just use Integer fields everywhere?
>>
>>Also, I know that Sql Server has other Int options too, like "Small Int" and "Tiny Int". Seems tempting, but we don't have that in VFP, and I really want to do all my schema changes in VFP as much as I can before I push it over.
>
>Matt,
>
>Check this recent blog on this exact topic
>
>SQL Server types: Numeric vs Int

You are always a great resource here!

Thanks.