>Bruce,
>
>I don't mean to jump into this thread.

No problem. It's good to hear from you!

However, it seems that some of my questions are answered by your answer here. I have been testing and trying to figure out what's the best way to port my code to Views. So far testing showed me I could do what you explained as posting the DBC for the tables on the server and the Views of the data on the client side.
>

Yes, it can be done. This means, though, that at runtime your forms may need access to both DBC's. Whether using a commercial framework, or one of your own device, check into this to find out if mutiple DBC's are supported, or how you can make changes so that they are. Years ago, we modified the "original" Codebook 3 framework to handle this scenario. I know Mere Mortals now supports this, but I am not familiar with other frameworks. (feel free to jump in, you who use the other frameworks).

>I'm assuming that posting the views on the client side cleared up any contention problems you had seen?

Yep. Runs much faster and no contention problems.

>
>Also, have you tried wrapping your DBC of views into the app's EXE to protect them from getting modified by the client?
>
>TIA

That can be done, too. I haven't used that approach because we wanted to be able to issue an update to the views (performance tuning, etc.) without having to update the EXE as well. Many times, of course, you have to update both anyway.

- Bruce Allen
- Left Brain Incorporated