SNIP
>
>Jos -- amen to what you are saying here... In addition, Michael says:
>
>>>I have a VFP7 client application running on about 3 PCs (W98SE / WXP) against a shared VFP database
>
>... It is possible that the issue occurs when the user seems to have EXCLU use but actually does not. This can happen because XP and Win98 lock files differently.

The MSKB article I found regarding this specifically stated peer-to-peer with the 'server' being a Win98 machine.
That's one reason I asked about the server's OS (never got that answer), though "a large network" was stated which seemed to preclude Win98 as the answer.

But also, the last report had it (apparently) disappearing the .DBF right away, which only adds to the confusion. I mean that **IF** the table does have deleted records then a (internal) copy is mandated and if it has nothing to delete then it would remain untouched but only after reading it to learn the condition.
There was no indication of the size of the table but if it happened to be cached then all of it would happen real fast, possibly **appearing** as failing before starting when it is otherwise.
>
>It is not a specifically Fox issue, although as usual Fox is going to make it more obvious .
>
>I think there are some read-caching issues involved, and also that it may happen more frequently on a Novell network. But this is just an impression, no hard evidence.

That's the other reason why I asked about the server OS. Not that I could/would have 'solved' it, but I'm sure it would have given others in the know a clue if there was something to it.

It's difficult solving things when less than half the factors are described.

cheers

>
>If this is involved, only "workaround" would be to make sure that all clients are on the same OS.
>
>>L<