>>>So, by having .T. for the first 2 parameters, this means the TableUpdate() will save everything for all table. In our case, we have the TableUpdate() in a loop which is executed for each table in the DE. Am I saying right that we can remove the 2nd .T.?
>>
>>yes, just like closing table, you can:
>
>In our case, we discovered a problem when the framework is being used extensily by several operators doing a save at the same time. We've been looking for a few days to find the reason. At this point, we can't say it is related to that. But, at least, if we can optimize the save time, it might be a good thing to do. What was happening is by having the double .T., if we have 10 tables in the DE, this means we were doing a TableUpdate() on all of them 10 times instead of one time per table. Does that make sense?

Quite la, But VFP check whether you have give CHANGE on Table before update!!

If nothing CHANGE, Maybe SOme ERROR Message prompt As Nothing UPDATE.... #_#'
But actually reason I really donno...

For more reasonable and maintainable update:

Cursorsetprop("Buffer",5,"Table1")
Select Table1
Tableupdate(.t.)

*Or Simple Tableupdate(.t., Table1)

Because the terrible thing is you donno what the 10 Table pointers locate
if you simply update all!