>Hi Hilmar,
>
>Well, my purpose is to an object in a way so that i can restore it with all its functionality as fast as possible. You tell me that the file-size can increase very quickly and that means slowing down the retrieval of the object i think. Therefore it looks like i have to follow your suggestion but it will require more programming.
>My thoughts were, if i can store an entire object and retrieve it the same way i don't have to worry about reading and writing every property. You showed a way to do this in an easy way and is for me a good solution.
>But i am still curious if an object can be stored and retrieved in a general field. If it can be done, i can compare the performence of both methods to see which method delivers the best way to do it.
>
>Thanks for your helpful advice,
>
>Erwin

Erwin,
I don't think what you want to do is possible either way.

WRT saving an object to a general field, I don't believe this will work because generals are used to hold file-based items. Since you are dealing with a memory-based entity (it would appear from your description), you can't get it into the general field.

WRT using AMEMBERS() to enumerate the PEMs and saving the information, AMEMBERS() doesn't work with COM-based objects. PEMs of COM-based objects only show up if they have already been accessed. Once accessed the information is loaded into cache and VFP then can load it into the array created by AMEMBERS(). If you already know the name of the PEMs you want to save, you can certainly save those off. However, if you don't know the names and simply want a generci approach to grab everything, you are out of luck.

Regards.