>>Gustavo,
>>
>>One design change suggestion would be to break the DBC into multiple smaller DBC's. 750 tables in one dbc is quite alot and it would seem that those tables could be logically devided up into smaller groups.
>
>Have you looked in the Stonefield Data Toolkit? It was designed to change tables more easily than standard VFP code.
>
>Barbara
Barbara,
I use Stonefield alot and you're right it is a great tool. But I still think there is a design flaw when a database has 750+ tables in it. I cna't imagine the business problem that has 750 closely related tables that require being in one dbc.