Arnon,

Thanks for the reply (and it is unfortunate that the tabularized data did not appear so well in my message).

Your response is what I had *suspected*, but with the labelling so "clear" I was worried that there was some other way to see it that I just was not getting.

It makes sense with your interpretation, so I will assume that this is yet another case where the documentation is deficient.

regards,
Jim N.
>
>this is an example of how a buffer look - with table buffering on
>after record 7-9 been edited 4 records were appended and one of them was deleted
>
>Arnon