>>>My understanding of table buffering is that is a level of buffering higher than transaction buffering. That is, stuff put in the table buffer during a transaction block will remain intact even if a rollback is issued. The observed behavior seems to be contrary to my knowledge as illustrated by the following code:
>>
>>We have similar understanding Taylor. In fact, we do no longer used Transaction/Rollback syntax because it works useless if using Buffering, TableUpdate, TableRevert etc., etc. or maybe we have the wrong approach. As I understand, Transaction/Rollback are FP original syntax and not on VFP.
>>
>>>Please respond with work arounds, and affirmations that yes, this is a bug, or no this is working as expected.
>>>TIA,
>>>Peter
>
>Hi,
>
>I believe that buffering can be used in conjunction with transaction processing or you can simply use transaction processing. I do the both thing involving buffered tables and a begin/end transaction. Each has it's own buffered region which must successfully complete to have the data put on the disk. This provides assurances that all data has been updated together. You should read;
>"Where the Data Goes to Hide" by Andy Neil in the Feb 1998 Advisor.
>
>Steve

Hi Steve,
Thanks for your comments! I think I need to research more regarding Transaction/Buffering. I must admit I did not have a thorough investigation on it yet.