>Hi Victor,
>
>>>Why not including it into the executable itself?
>>>
>>
>>I might be mistaken - but I don't think VFP lets you include dbc's in the .exe
>
>Yes it does.
>
>>plus who whats to recompile everytime you change a table structure and a view?
>
>Well the discussion was about including a DBC for view definitions, not the DBC which is you production database (in which you are correct that it will cause problems)
>
>>What you can do is include it in the setup, then when the application starts have it run something (like a stonefield process) to see if any of the views need to be updated. This is something else I've done in the past.
>
>This is also a strategy. But if you include it into your exe you don't have to be worried the database container in getting corrupted and you always know that the view definitions are up to date. Another benefit is that it will be the fastest way to use views as locks don't apply.
>
>Walter,

hmmmmmm...well I learn something new every day. Still though I would have to ponder the idea of putting the dbc in the exe. I suppose a big part of determining if that's the way to go would depend on how often your tables (and thus your views) are going to be changing. Plus it would be a good idea not to have any "Select *" in any views since that forces you to rebuild it if the table structure changes. I dunno - seems like alot of potential headaces. I like the idea of being able to update views without having to recompile - plus I don't even have to kick the users out of the application to do it.