Actually, Doug, it has ALWAYS been doing a copy then rename. Well, at least since 2.5.

>Tamar,
>
>Doesn't PACK now do essentially the same thing as the old COPY FOR NOT DELETED(), rename, rename approach now?
>
>That is, hasn't it been made more stable & robust and less prone to crashes?
>
>Haven't forgotten about the Chatter threads - I've been swamped! Hope all is well with you, Marshall & the kids...
>
>
>
>
>
>>>Yes I agree.. in theory,
>>>But there have been quite a few discussions regarding all this over the years and I think the general consensus is not to use pack (Hackers guide confirms this)
>>>Will
>>>
>>
>>FWIW, we're changing our mind in the new version of the Hacker's Guide.
>>
>>Tamar