Nadya,

I hadn't looked closely at his suggestion, so I qualified my statement with "at least a variation" *grin*

No, I don't think it would not work as is...but you would do a SEEK, and then in the REPLACE WHILE command use an expression with NVL() to get everything to match up. As Larry pointed out, it takes Rushmore out of the picture.

>>Hello Nadya,
>>
>>Well, I think Larry has given you the answer, or at least a variation of the correct answer. Do a SEEK, and then do a REPLACE WHILE...I think it will be the best performance you can get.
>
>Would NULL records be updated by this command?
>>