Eryk,
Still a third thought in addition to Cindy's and Mike's---

We had trouble with Seek() returning .F. just as you have. It turned out to be a problem with the network. Changing to 100baseT and a faster hub solved the problem.

Indexing had no effect

The problem was random - it would work correctly on one record for 15 times and not find it the 16th time.

We didn't have the Update Conflict problem you speak of, though.

Barbara


>I have used seek() to look up information in huge tables (they were read only, no new records) and I was really pleased with it.
>
>Recently I have used seek() with tables updated frequently by a few users and also automatically by a program. It all works on WinNT net. Buffering and transactions are involved.
>
>I have encountered 2 problems which made me change seek() into select sql
>(they happen occasionally)
>
>1) seek() returns .F. while I know that a record exists and can be found for example by locate
>
> I think that index might be corrupted but no error happens.
> This problem appears when program works continuously for a few hours.
> Unfortunately reindex can not be used because it would slow down the program for too long.
>
>2) I get the error message "Update conflict".
> A debugger shows the line with seek()!!!
>
>I have solved my problems by using select sql instead. But I’m really curious what is going on. I would appreciate any comments.
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Eryk Remiorz