Hi Doru,

>If we go back to the scenario described in the original post, we do not add/insert records to that table. From what you and Jim say, I stil don't know if TABLEVALIDATE 2 will be any different than TABLEVALIDATE 0 for that scenario.
>

If you don't modify the table, TABLEVALIDATE=2 doesn't do anything for you.

>What I wanted is this: validate the header when you USE the table , BUT, do not trigger an error if the header cannot be locked, IOW do not assume anything if the validation cannot be performed. Wasn't this how things were in FPD/FPW?
>

Validation is either performed or not performed. If you use TABLEVALIDATE=1 or 3 then you ask for the validation that locks the header and thus failure to lock the header can not be ignored. If you don't care about this validation, use TABLEVALIDATE=0 or 2.

There is an easy workaround, try it first with TABLEVALIDATE=1 the if it fails due to the lock conflict try it with TABLEVALIDATE=0.

Thanks,
Aleksey Tsingauz.