>On Tue, August 14, 2012 10:57 am, Alan Bourke wrote: > > Another thing - if you don't use a DBC then you can't use transactional > > updates of tables, so for me the vanishingly small chance of getting a > > corrupted DBC that you could get back by restoring 3 files from from > > yesterday's backup is vastly outweighed by this fact. --
I like, and use, DBCs for only two things: 1. Default values for pk fields (I still use my own key generator; I've had it since long before VFP had auto-increment, and I didn't like the limitations that the auto-increment implementation imposed when it finally arrived). 2. Being able to OPEN DATABASE "[some drive]:\[some path]\foo.dbc", SET DATABASE TO "[some drive]:\[some path]\foo.dbc", and then forget about paths to data from there on in. I used the triggers for one VFP 6 application that needed them for a third-party transaction logger. It worked okay but it slowed things down. I haven't bothered with triggers since. In the early days I had some trouble with DBCs getting messed up--backlinks dropped and so forth--but once I understood how everything worked, I never had any more problems with them. Ken Dibble www.stic-cil.org _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
