>>I HAVE A MAIN DBF WHICH SHARES A FIELD with another database. that field is the link. my question is why not put it all in the main database?
>
>There could be a couple of reasons to do this. If there will always be one and only one row in Table B for each row in Table A, then you might want to do this if the combined number of columns exceeds the maximum number of columns allowed (255 in VFP), or if the size of the combined table would exceed the VFP limit of 2GB.
>
>Another reason would be if only some of the rows in table A need the columns that are in table B, then you would save space in the database by having a row in table B only where needed.

If thats the only reason than I think I may be better off just having it all in the main dbf. My main only has about 40 fields and the otherone has about 30.
the entire size of them combined is about 13 meg. Does this sounds like a good idea