Hi Ed

Al Doman pointed me to MS's acknowledgment that FPW can't use more than 120 files in ME (perVMFiles doesn't work for FPW) and a supported fix that I think may solve it.

Actually the app does have a great number of tables open at once - though of course not exceeding the Win/DOS limit of 255. Definitely requires more than 120 however.

Re working in FPW - couldn't agree more about porting to VFP - exactly what I'm working on now, and of cours all new development has been in VFP 6.0 (even better - VFE 6.32 < g > for some time now ) But since supporting my FPW 2.6 apps for just one client still brings in over $100k a year while I'm doing the porting it seems worthwhile to keep it working on my laptop < bg >

As far as FPDOS - hmmm can't even remember the last time I *saw* one of those < s >

Thanks, as always, for taking the time to help.

>
>Since Win9x can't have more than 255 file handles open at once, it's really unlikely that your app has all the files open at once. This is not an PF/FPW thing; it's a DOS/Win16 thing. ME adjusts the PerVMFiles by some amount (~53) for it's own use.
>
>>With your reassurance I'll give it another shot. Have you actually done this with an app you know requires more than 150 files open?
>
>I've used it on FPDOS apps and VFP apps with tremendously large file counts; I avoided (and now, even turn down 'opportunities' to work with) FPW like the plague. There absolutely no reason IMO for continuing to work with it; it's no longer supported, and almost certainly reflects the worst of the Fox product problems. The DOS products in conjunction with Y2KFOX are far less problematic than FPW which needs the speed patch at a minimum, plus something like Y2KFOX for the Y2K issues, and the Win16 compatibility issues are far less clear than the DOS compatibility issues.
>
>I suggest you start porting into VFP - I would not be surprised if XP/Whistler is going to need to run FPW in some compatibility mode.