I don't use table buffering or field->control binding (for that matter) - my programs are very fast and never break.

The chances of the network breaking during your write do not present any more of a problem than a procecessor hiccup during a DB update.

My opinion is that using lower level xBase functions (like replace and seek) are better that using macro-engines like table updates and buffering - besides, they are very fast.

If you notice, the high end performance vehicles - like Porsche and Ferrari stiill use "clutch" transmissions. Race cars use "clutches" too! Why don't they use "automatic" transmissions? Because they're not as fast - eg - they loose races!

>I would like to know what is the best way to avoid corruption of tables.
>
>I made an application where the user can sell tickets, and because there is no "saving" method, I use no table buffering, to make it simple. I just replace the number of tickets in the field when the sale is done.
>

REPLACE TotalSold WITH TotalSold + 1 IN Shows
>THISFORM.REFRESH()

>When the table is open without buffer, I can see when another user updates the number of sold tickets. (The form displays the total number of sold tickets from that field.)
>
>However, i am concerned that because I don't use buffering table corruption might occur when the network connection breaks down or the computer crashes. Is it better to use always table buffering (5) and would this avoid corruption, or are there other ways to avoid corruption?
>
>Thanks for your input.