>I have heard conflicting stories as to whether or not NT has the same 2GB limit on file size that earlier versions of Windows had. In fact, it's not an area where I have many clear facts at all.
>
>If there is no limit to file size in NT (or a very large one), should we put a request to break the 2GB table size limit onto the wish list?

NT can have a volume of tremendous size (in the terabyte range). You can already access non-native VFP tables (eg SQL Server databases with primary tables whose size exceeds 2GB) within VFP through SPT or Remote Views.

I suspect that MS isn't going to change the 2GB native file size limit in the near future, since it'll probably affect some of the underlying low-level file handling, and the size of things used to represent offsets in a file (right now, at 2GB, a signed integer of 4 bytes length can represent an offset; bumping it from there would change every data structure that contained an offset within VFP at a minimum.)

You're free to make the request, though; it just happens that there are good, pragmatic reasons for the limit in this case. We'd lose a great deal of backwards file format compatibility with this change, since now, more than just the headers of a VFP(n+some value) table would be affected.