I've seen the same type of corruption of the x_ files. In very early releases we had to go to the os level to delete the x_ file and then copy and rename *any* x_ from a different file to the desired file and rebuild....
However, I've never seen an index that would work from within a program that would not work from a Uniquery... Allen from HOT, Smokey and muggy SoCalUsa -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 12:39 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: {Blocked Content} RE: [U2] UD: Using indexes in UniQuery I knew the index dictionary was virtual - I was wondering if the clientno etc were maybe translates or something else that that the select query might use to invalidate the index. I think the only trouble we ever had with UD indices what that it wasn't actually built - but your list.index showed it as being built. Never really had to test if the index was used - it was always way faster. It would be interesting to know how long an un-indexed select would take on the two boxes. The only thing I've had to do with and index is delete and re-create it. Make sure you DELETE-INDEX GLPOST ALL, then make sure the X_GLPOST file has been removed. Then re-create and re-build the index - making sure no one is accessing the file at the time. I have seen an index that was created while the file was actively being updated do some strange things. hth Colin Alfke Calgary Canada ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
