>David,
>
>Strictly a SWAG, but data beyond the first 2-GIG boundary would be my first suspect.
>
>I'm assuming, of course, that you have elected FAT-32 for the drive.
>

No - NTFS


>A story about RAID-5. . . when I had a say in such things, I wanted to install RAID-5 on a brand new high-falutin box (StorageWorks) we had bought. I was abnoxiously insistent, claiming the virtues I had read all about.
>They eventually called in a guy who had REAL experience with it - in fact with a failure. Yes, he said, things remain technically "available", but in the case of the failure experienced it took the box 30+ HOURS to rebuild a failed drive and the I/O was so intensive during that whole time that access was essentially nil anyways.
>
>Just to point out that what sounds good often ain't so in the real world. We stuck with RAID-2 (I think it was).
>
>Cheers,
>Jim N
>
>>I have an app that was developed under FoxW 2.5b, which has alway ran fine under WinNT. As a matter of fact, my development machine has always been a WinNT 4.0 machine. We got a new Pentium II recently, and it will not run our app. It generates several I/O - related errors during the setup phase. The first error that occurs is a #1001 when I do a MODIFY WINDOW to set the main window's title and icon. After that, I get several #1002 when opening tables that are compiled into the app, or creating new tables.
>>
>>The machine is a custom made 300 mhz Pentium II with an internal 9GB SCSI drive and an external hardware RAID-5 and 256 MB RAM. Everything is installed on the internal drive, the RAID is not used at all. The app works when started from my machine over the network. From the new machine, I can start FoxPro, which is on my development machine, but I get I/O errors (#1002) when I try to open any project files.
>>


We use RAID-5 because the machine is used primarily to process/produce large amounts of data on a quarterly basis, which is used in GIS-related applications that we develop. The parity feature ensures that we can rebuild the data in case of a disk failure. This is usually done overnight by the outfit that sold us the RAID, which is acceptable under the conditions that we use the array.

>>Anybody out there with any ideas as to what could be the problem???