Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...?

#**311**

Quote:

The "only" problem with cMax that I know is that it requires a full
lock
which of course could be problematic on a shared table. However, I
have never heard that it has cause a GPF and using it against a
table in PRIV that is not being edited shouldn't be a problem. At
least that is how I have

Except that when the issue was presented he wasn't using

riv: - he
changed it later.

Quote:

Well as this is a discussion forum and the traffic isn't exactly
heavy I find it interesting to discuss a problem and find a
plausible solution. IMHO

Well, I think we did that. I was hoping only to avoid the 'why does
Paradox act that way', which I figured was next, when there is no one
here who could even begin to answer.

--
------------------------------
Tony McGuire

#**312**

Quote:

The "only" problem with cMax that I know is that it requires a full
lock
which of course could be problematic on a shared table. However, I
have never heard that it has cause a GPF and using it against a
table in PRIV that is not being edited shouldn't be a problem. At
least that is how I have

Except that when the issue was presented he wasn't using

riv: - he
changed it later.

Quote:

Well as this is a discussion forum and the traffic isn't exactly
heavy I find it interesting to discuss a problem and find a
plausible solution. IMHO

Well, I think we did that. I was hoping only to avoid the 'why does
Paradox act that way', which I figured was next, when there is no one
here who could even begin to answer.

--
------------------------------
Tony McGuire

#**313**

Quote:

The "only" problem with cMax that I know is that it requires a full
lock
which of course could be problematic on a shared table. However, I
have never heard that it has cause a GPF and using it against a
table in PRIV that is not being edited shouldn't be a problem. At
least that is how I have

Except that when the issue was presented he wasn't using

riv: - he
changed it later.

Quote:

Well as this is a discussion forum and the traffic isn't exactly
heavy I find it interesting to discuss a problem and find a
plausible solution. IMHO

Well, I think we did that. I was hoping only to avoid the 'why does
Paradox act that way', which I figured was next, when there is no one
here who could even begin to answer.

--
------------------------------
Tony McGuire

#**314**

Quote:

The "only" problem with cMax that I know is that it requires a full
lock
which of course could be problematic on a shared table. However, I
have never heard that it has cause a GPF and using it against a
table in PRIV that is not being edited shouldn't be a problem. At
least that is how I have

Except that when the issue was presented he wasn't using

riv: - he
changed it later.

Quote:

Well as this is a discussion forum and the traffic isn't exactly
heavy I find it interesting to discuss a problem and find a
plausible solution. IMHO

Well, I think we did that. I was hoping only to avoid the 'why does
Paradox act that way', which I figured was next, when there is no one
here who could even begin to answer.

--
------------------------------
Tony McGuire

#**315**

Quote:

The "only" problem with cMax that I know is that it requires a full
lock
which of course could be problematic on a shared table. However, I
have never heard that it has cause a GPF and using it against a
table in PRIV that is not being edited shouldn't be a problem. At
least that is how I have

Except that when the issue was presented he wasn't using

riv: - he
changed it later.

Quote:

Well as this is a discussion forum and the traffic isn't exactly
heavy I find it interesting to discuss a problem and find a
plausible solution. IMHO

Well, I think we did that. I was hoping only to avoid the 'why does
Paradox act that way', which I figured was next, when there is no one
here who could even begin to answer.

--
------------------------------
Tony McGuire

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...?

comp.databases.paradox comp.databases.paradox

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...? - 02-21-2008 , 08:23 AM

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...? - 02-21-2008 , 08:23 AM

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...? - 02-21-2008 , 08:23 AM

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...? - 02-21-2008 , 08:23 AM

Re: Same form, but one system GPFs...? - 02-21-2008 , 08:23 AM