Hi Walter

>>But the real question is, do you know if there is any truth to the idea that the transaction is "safe" since all tables are in a single DBC?
>
>It is also 'safe' if the tables are accross different DBCs. It really does not matter. If wrapping updates in mutliple DBCs into one transaction, and the transactions fails and you do a rollback all changes are rolled back.

Well, it's Drew's opinion that there is a risk which I'm trying to understand by getting more input on it.

>
>And of course a VFP transaction is not really safe compared to the ACID properties found in SQL server. If during the transaction the power goes off, you don't know what you'll end up with.

I know. But that's not the point here.

>
>>The whole point of this second DBC is to have it on the local machine along with the exe.
>
>Why not including it into the executable itself?

If I'm not mistaken, the view requires a lock on the DBC. This lock cannot be obtained if the DBC is in the exe.