>Sergey-
>
>>Is there any reason you are using !EOF("Table_B") instead of FOUND("TABLE_B")?
>>I think !EOF("Table_B") wouldn't work properly if SET NEAR ON.
>

I still don't understand while are you using !EOF("Table_B") instead of FOUND("TABLE_B")

>No, I meant EOF(). I don't use NEAR ON, generally, and missed that that was a criteria of the original post. Was it? IAC, I don't see how it relates. Let's say I have:
>

"PETEBT "
>"PETER  "
>"PTB    "

>And I SEEK("PETERA"). Both SEEK() and FOUND() return .F. All SET NEAR does is position the pointer on "PTB ".
>
>Do you find FOUND() and SEEK() to return different values? Honestly, I've never noticed that.

There was no mention about NEAR ON in original post but it doesn't mean that it's OFF. Yes, FOUND() and SEEK() will return the same value. However you are using EOF() not FOUND() or SEEK(). In case when record is not found the value returned by EOF() would depends on setting of NEAR. On other hand the value returned by FOUND() is always consistent.