This sounds promising... We are running W'95 PCs on an NT server. Does that sound
like your suggestion would apply?

>We had a similar problem a few years ago with Fox for Windows 2.6a running on a NT Server/Netware network. We were handling timesheet data entry and occasionally two users would get the same key value although it was RLOCKed and tested ahead of time. The solution we came up with was to USE the single row table each time.
>
>Later I discovered a registry setting for NT to ensure that the disk cache was flushed, the actual registry entry escapes me at the moment but if you are using NT I'll go look for it.
>
>Best regards
>
>
>Simon
>
>
>>>>>>>>How can this code:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>IF RLOCK()
>>>>>>>>REPLACE DateComp WITH DATE()
>>>>>>>>ENDIF
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>cause this error:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Record is in use by another"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the line that causes the error is the line with the REPLACE on it. I thought
>>>>>>>>that if RLOCK() is true, then no-one else can possibly have the record open.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What gives?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Are you opening the table in more than one area?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is your multilocks setting?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Are you opening the table in more than one area?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is your multilocks setting?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does that help?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I believe someone else had a similar error but had the same table open in more than one area. But I can't duplicate this error. If you cut out just that snippet of code and run it does it generate the same error?
>>>>
>>>>I haven't tried that (yet). The error doesn't occur consistently.
>>>>
>>>>The system is for conducting surveys and each phoner is supposed to get the
>>>>next available phone number. I stuff the DateComp field with DATE() before displaying
>>>>the phone number and I test for DateComp <> DATE() to determine if a record is
>>>>available or not. What's happening is that two phoners are sometimes getting the
>>>>same phone number.
>>>>
>>>>I know that this doesn't help much, I'll try to duplicate the problem on a smaller
>>>>scale.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>I really don't see the use of date() here...
>>>
>>>Vlad
>>
>>Vlad
>>
>>The DateComp field is used on several reports. Since I capture the date before
>>displaying the phone number, it also serves (or should serve) the purpose of a
>>"used record" indicator. Records with dates are not available to other users.