Jim,

I go back further than that and old habits die hard... <g>

>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