As many have ask......
WHY 700 tables??
You have really sparked my curiosity.
What are you doing??
GARY
At 09:50 AM 9/26/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Michael,
>
>Are they in effect the same 130 columns in all 700 tables? Could you
>possibly have one table with 131 columns, the extra one to identify
>what distinguishes one of your tables from another? Seems like that
>would reduce coding effort by a huge factor, too, since you wouldn't
>have to have code to deal with 700 table names, and forms and reports
>that dealt with 700 tables.
>
>Bill
>
>On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 23:12:51 -0700, Michael Young wrote:
>
> >Hi Ben,
> >
> >Actually I would prefer to keep them in one database but as you have
>seen in
> >other posts I am exceeding the number of columns so I am forced to
>either
> >use a DBASE file or multiple R:Base databases.
Regards,
Gary L. Winzeler
DAQtech, Inc.
Data Acquisition Technology
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.daqtech.com/>
Office 408-847-4800
Fax 408-847-4097
Cellular 408-483-7739
