Hello DragonK, Essentially, when you have 1000's of uses banging on your software, many with poorly maintained/infected machines things that seldom happen on well maintained PC's will happen all the time. Some of my users have daily Windows crashes and assume that it's a normal experience for windows users (it's always a hardware or driver problem any more though). Weekly, I get emails from people telling me that my software is crashing their PC's when you all know that's impossible. Typically, it ends up being bad RAM.
Losing data was one problem, the other was, once the DB becomes corrupt, it needs to be deleted before you can use it again. Vacuum may be better these days but, back when I ran into this, it wouldn't always fix the file. All it takes is for a user to kill the software with task manager and you may end up with a bad DB. On my personal PC, which doesn't crash and has a UPS, corruption wasn't an issue. C Wednesday, February 7, 2007, 12:36:10 PM, you wrote: D> On 2/7/07, Teg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hello ohadp, >> >> Well, my experience is, particularly when it's users using it and not >> a personal project, that corruption happens fairly frequently when you >> use this pragma. That's why I don't use it any more in my production >> code. >> >> Transactions are far safer and fast too. >> >> Indeed, transactions are safer. D> But I wonder, why did you experienced corruption with this pragma? Was it D> because of crashes of the OS or the application? Or are there other factors D> which can corrupt the data if not syncing ? As I understood from the D> documentation, the only thing that can corrupt data when using this pragma D> are crashes and power failures. -- Best regards, Teg mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
