Hi Jim,

I'm sorry, I've made a typo on my first post. My fingers didn't follow the orders that my brain was sending them (they do have a brain of their own :) I was also checking the same bible...

Nobody is perfect

>In your first post on this you stated that the field involved with the FOR *does* exist in the destination table.
>
>That didn't seem right to me so I checked Hacker's Guide and it says does *not* exist....
>Now, here, I see you also write **not exist**.
>
>I wonder if this thread might have taken a different turn if your first had said NOT?