>>>No you wouldn't lose automatic update management.
>>>Yes it wouldn't check other modified fields.
>>>IMHO this setting (WhereType=1 KeyFieldsOnly) is what most applications need for most of the tables. I would prefer tracking other users' changes via a timestamp column rather than generating a long where clause (think you've 100 fields table and a where clause checks all of them).
>>
>>I think that solution (timestamp column) would be specifically for SQL Server? How about local views, or other database servers?
>
>No timestamp is for any backend including foxbase,fox2x tables. When I said timestamp I didn't specifically mean MSSQL's timestamp column. Just create one of your own. For example for a simple free table it might even be an integer keeping the revision count of record. If what you've (you increment it by one) gte than the one on disk it's modified by someone else.
>Cetin

That is an interesting idea. But I am not sure how to implement it.

1) If I increment the revision count (or timestamp) in a trigger, I will get an error message. Can I do this in a record validation rule? Or do I have to do it at the form level?

2) How do I tell the view to use the key field and the revision number field, to check for changes?