>Hi
>I have read message #583143 and other relavent thread. I would like to clarify that:
>
>

>Does it meant, adding
>field1   C(10)
>field2   I
>fieldPrimary
>

>
>before fieldprimary able to solve the problem of primary key corruption?
>Also, If my primarykey is a composite key which combine 2 or more fields, do I need to add 2 dummy fields too?
>Ex.
>FieldA
>FieldB
>FIeldC
>
>Index Expr:
>PrimaryKey FieldB+FieldC
>
>Or I should have a additional field that is combination of FieldB and C?
>
>Thank you
John,
There is a lot written here and elsewhere about "Primary" keys. Most seem to discourage the use of two fields combined to form a primary key.
Have you considered adding an integer primary key with a key generator?
Can you describe your current primary key and the fields that make it up and any validation or triggers on those fields.
Also VFP5 is fairly old - in that there have been lots of advances since then. You probably have to wait only about a month or so to get VFP8 which has addressed this issue of auto incrementing keys for use as Primary keys. This sounds a lot easier than going down some Linux road, which of course only addresses file sharing, which is probably not the cause of your problem, in that you would be getting warnings if there were too many shares.
If that XP workstation has a share printer, move the printer to another machine, this would lighten the sharing load.
Is it possible that the set deleted is interfering with the visibility of one of these keys in the primary index?
On XP pro under My Computer | Properties | Advanced | Performance Settings there are some settings that you can alter to allocate priorities - worth a look.
As to costs, I would be more comfortable running this sort of operation on a fast SCSI drive - but that can cost as much as a low end work station - lots of trade offs!
In the way of alternatives, lots of us here will look at your code to see if there is anything that might be causing the problems. For example when a record fails to appear - is that through looking at the records directly from the table with the order set to the pmimary key, or is it a view - in that case lets look at the code.

HTH
Regards