Hi Elmer,

Yes, I know about it and even warned in my first message. Moreover, we faced this situation in our production and KEYWORD again was a culprit. So, you're right.

BTW, note in my UseTble function I close table opened because if I would like to open it exclusively, I need to close it first...

So, you proved the importance of your check after the table is opened.

>Nadya, The original post was as follows
>
>"What is the best way to check to see if a table can be open exclusively before opening it exclusively and getting an error?
>
>In this case I want to do an ocassional PACK if there are no other users using the database, but of course use summary excl produces an error if other users are using the db.
>
>Thanks!
>Marvin Masson"
>
>
>The above message did not indicate that Marvin wanted to know if anyone else has the table open exclusively, but how to avoid an error on pack or other commands which require the table to _be_ opened exclusively
>
>Try this - Create a table test.dbf
>

*!* the following line is somewhere else in your code
>use test.dbf alias test1 shared in 0
>*!* not readily apparent that I or someone else has the table exclusive or otherwise
>
>llOpenError = .f.
>m.lcOldError = on("error")
>on error llOpenError = .t.
>use test.dbf alias test exclusive in 0 again
>on error &lcOldError
>if !llOpenError
>	* we opened the file exclusively
>	*!* but is it really?
>	messagebox("VFP did not throw an error -llOpenError assumes test is open exclusively")
>	select test
>        *!* Pack generates error table not open exclusively
>	pack
>else
>	* could not exclusively open file
>	messagebox("VFP threw an error - Did not get test.dbf exclusively")
>
>endif
>if used("test") and isexclusive("test")
>	*!* this line only executes when test.dbf can be opened exclusively
>        select test
>        *!* Pack table is successful
>	pack
>else
>	*!* did not get table exclusively, I don't care why
>	messagebox("Did not get test.dbf exclusively")
>endif
>

>Admittedly, issuing "use test.dbf exclusive in 0 again" is a stretch and not a wise thing to do if you really want to open a table exclusively, but it can happen and VFP will not throw an error.
>
>Elmer
>
>>Your check would make sense after we attempted to open the table. Did we really open it exclusive? This check, however, would not let us know, if the table is opened exclusive somewhere or not...
>>
>>So, I would probably put this check afterwards as a precaution...
>>
>>>
>>>>>Nadya,