>>It is perfectly possible that the tableupdate for one will succeed and the other two will fail.

Or...some records in a table will update, and other records in the same table WILL NOT update....

Yet once again, I think we are dealing with an individual that lacks a basic understanding of how VFP works....<s>.....



>>Now I see what you mean. I have never used transactions this way. IMO, transaction is suited for applying changes to multiple tables at the same time and dynamically. Let say, we have cmdSave.click code that writes changes to three tables (one parent and two childs) and it's required to provide that changes will be really written to all tables, even if something will happen dow the road (e.g you wrote changes to the first child and then found parent record locked). In case you described (static), it's not job for transaction, it's really buffering (standard or simulated) task.
>
>Ed,
>
>You are mistaken here, buffering will do nothing at all to insure that all tabl;es are updated properly. Buffering only applies to one table. It is perfectly possible that the tableupdate for one will succeed and the other two will fail. The ONLY tool avaiable for this is a transaction, as a matter of fact, this is the only benefit of a transaction, making multiple table updates a single all or none operation.