Hi Mike,

Thanks for your reply. Actually, the selecting and updating are two separate processes and two separate individual applications. I made an assumption (which is right under our curcumstances), what if number of records would be more than, say, 10000, this file would be used only by one user. Therefore where is no need of Table buffering in terms of multi-user issue, since it's only single-user. It still may be a problem, if power accedentally shuts off, but let's not expect the worse scenario. Therefore I add a condition checking the number of records, and if we have huge file, I don't use table buffering... This solved this problem.

Again, thanks all of you for your input. I appreciate it.

>Hi Nadya,
>
>I noticed that you said the table used by this process was created via SQL Select. It sounds like after the SQL Select you're issuing REPLACE statements that cause 700,000 and some records to be changed. I wonder if you could eliminate this problem entirely by doing whatever the calculations are in the SQL statement itself? Don't forget you can call UDFs from a SQL Select.
>
>Also, if the table is created via SQL Select, unless you are closing the table after you create it, the current user is going to have it open exclusively, so, unless you need to revert, there's really no point in using any kind of buffering.