In addition to what GB offered, we also have SET EXACT OFF/on that allows for partial key matches.

>Thank's Craig for your quick response, it worked perfect. It makes the syntax
>that i have to use in SEEK's a little bit more complicated, but I'm completely
>satisfied with the solution.
>
>Thank You
>
>/Torgny
>
>
>
>>INDEX ON STR(99999999 - VAL(cAuktCID)) + STR(99999999 - VAL(cObjectCID)) ;
>>+ STR(99999999 - nOffer) + cID TAG MyTag
>>
>>
>>The DESCENDING keyword applies to the entire index, not just a particular field.
>>
>>>Can anyone help me with the right syntax for an indexkey that sort the following data:
>>>
>>>
>>>cAuktCID cObjectCID nOffer CID
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 129"
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 126"
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 128"
>>>" 21" " 83" 650.00 " 125"
>>>
>>>
>>>I want it to look like this when it's indexed.
>>>
>>> Desc Desc Desc Asce
>>>" 21" " 83" 650.00 " 125"
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 126"
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 128"
>>>" 21" " 83" 567.00 " 129"
>>>
>>>I have tried with this, but i does not work:
>>>cAuktCID + cObjectCID + STR(nOffer) + STR(VAL(cid)*-1) DESCENDING
>>>
>>>The 3 first columns gets sorted right but CID-column always
>>>ends up in descending order although i use -1 in the calculation.
>>>What am i missing here ?