>I suppose I could have two views, but it was going to be so elegant...the reason using the same view was so perfect is because I am copying the exact same types of records from one staff ID to another. I had no idea that a view opened into two different work areas would still insist on using the same buffer and all (is that what is going on?) Does anyone else find this design a bit braindead? I mean, a view is basically just packaged SQL with some extra rules on how to do updates, so why must two instances of the view share the link and buffer? That would be like two instances of a class writing to the same memory...Thank God that is not the way it works. *smile*.

I've just opened a p-view in one work area, with one set of parameters, got two records. Changed the parameters, opened it under a different alias in another work area, got another set of three records, different from the first one. Went back to the first view, it still had the original two records. Great. Then I requeried, and, of course, got the same records as in the second one. Could it be you had the same scenario going on?