I did not see anything to indicate this is resolved so I will continue.
There are only a few ways that the value can be changed the way it did and most of them are not readily available to the casual user. However, the documentation indicates that exposure of the table to a version of VFP prior to 8 could corrupt the settings.
Can you rule out that possibility?
B+
HALinNY
=> -----Original Message-----
=> From: profox-bounces At leafe .DOT com
=> [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of James E Harvey
=> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 14:59
=> To: \'ProFox Email List\'
=> Subject: RE: Auto Inc as PK index
=>
=> The "width" setting is "4"
=>
=> -----Original Message-----
=> From: profox-bounces At leafe .DOT com
=> [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Hal Kaplan
=> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:23 AM
=> To: ProFox Email List
=> Subject: RE: Auto Inc as PK index
=>
=> What size is the field? Byte? 2? 4? 8?
=>
=> B+
=> HALinNY
=>
=> => Subject: Auto Inc as PK index
=> =>
=> => I am using an auto inc field as the pk index tag.
=> =>
=> => Today the user could not add a record due to pk
=> uniqueness violated?
=> =>
=> => I opened the table and found the "Next Value" set to "4"?
=> => There are over
=> => 275 records already in the table. I opened on older
=> backup => of the table and the "Next Value" was okay.
=> =>
=> => Does anyone know how the "Next Value" field could be
=> reset => to an apparently random number?
=> =>
=> => James E. Harvey
=>
©2006 Hal Kaplan |
