Thank you... GREAT idea, Good be a little painful, just suck in the memo fields when needed, data entry time, report printing time... Do you see any danger/risk with 233 fields, 226 without memo fields?
Regards, Desmond On 29 September 2014 13:30, Kevin Cully <kcu...@cullytechnologies.com> wrote: > I know this is beyond the topic of fixing your current situation, but I > wanted to throw this out there. > > I had trouble with a table with many memo field. It caused me no end of > troubles. The table held ITEMS that were for sale. I split out all of the > fields to another table called ITEMS_EXTRA that held basically all of memo > field information. > > It held the primary key, the foreign key to the item table, the memo field > type, memo field contents, date created and by who, date last updated and > by who. > > By splitting the memo fields away from the more conventional data, it made > the entire data system more stable and maintainable. > > HTH, > Kevin > > > On 09/29/2014 01:42 PM, Desmond Lloyd wrote: > >> Thank you Sir, >> >> Yeah, yeah I know it is getting older... I am too actually. It's all >> good, update to VFP9 with this application is going to be most painful... >> Might just have to bite the bullet... >> >> Regards, >> Desmond >> >> > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/caajxvamikacgqutswcsrhbrqx4pfg6nekoa46uuvjmdrxm1...@mail.gmail.com ** 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.
