The point is that this feature was in wish lists for many years, I think. If you work directly with tables, it is a very useful feature. I remember something about this autoincrementing field to be read-only for insert,replace,update statements, but I'm not sure.


>I can see the sense in that, almost. Indeed, since I uploaded the message, I've gone back to trying it that way (getting my own key values) and it works fine. But in that case, whats the point of having the wondrous DBC file which is supposed to take care of that sort of thing. IT knows what the next value should be because it stores it in the "next value" field in the Table Design data, AND its correctly incrementing the damn thing!
>
>Ach well, if it can't be done, it can't be done. At least you've stopped me banging my head against it.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
>>The problem is that remote view "doesn't know" the next integer id, and probably the default value is 0. If you want to add recods to view, you must know the next id before you add the record. The old method is better in this case - default value = getkey('{table_name}').
>>
>