I'm smiling while I type this because this is the same situation I am in. I am working on a system that took 10 years of development by numerous developers and the data is often handled the same way. With so many developers working on the system over a period of years, there is no standard in it. It is a FPD26 app that I'm converting it to VFP7 and in the process switching to buffering in the process. However, changing from using temporary tables to edit (as well as literally hundreds of arrays used for manipulating data) to buffering is a long process and requires changes in a LOT of areas - not just the data input/edit locations. The app is also written procedural and not OOP so that is a complete rewrite in many cases. This is a very time intensive process and I recommend that you change it to buffering when you can, but if it works well as is, leave it be. The labor to switch it to buffering would have to be justified with a clear benefit either in maintenance or production.

Tracy

>Hi all,
>
>A preferences and practices question.
>
>I have a VFP6 app that I am implementing and maintaining (written by others) that in the course of the user editing records, the developer does a lot of copying the records being updated out to a temp file, processing the edits, appending the records back to the tables, then deleting the original records.
>
>It seems that this would be a performance hit when the edits encompass a lot of records (this is a work order and inventory app), as well as requiring a pack every once in a while. It just seems easier to edit the record directly, but is this possible in a multi-user network app? It is a procedural rather than OOP style app. Looks more FPW2.6 than VFP. I want to know is this the best/preferred way to do this?
>
>TIA