TMG-L Archives
Archiver > TMG > 2000-10 > 0970656425
From:
Subject: Re: [TMG] Re: File extension .fpt)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 05:47:05 -0500
References: <4.1.20001001091221.00a8da60@pop.mis.net><4.1.20001002111717.009322c0@pop.mis.net><4.1.20001002193416.00931340@pop.mis.net><4.1.20001003093201.00b6b800@pop.mis.net><5.0.0.25.0.20001003132140.009f1690@127.0.0.1>
Allen, I was working only with one dataset having problems with
getting an exhibit, first internal and then external, to show in a
report. I deleted the attached exhibit with each effort. However, one
exhibit was left but did not show as an exhibit in any tag or person
screen worked on. The backup was huge. It was item 13 in the backup,
and I went to C drive and deleted the file. Returning to the dataset,
I received an error message with the advice that the dataset was
damaged, and to run repair.exe. I ran the program, and received an
entire page of damages in three datasets, all fixed. I then decided to
run repair.exe again to see if the report was clean. It was not; again
I received an entire page of damages in the remaining datasets which
had been repaired. The third attempt at repair resulted in a clean
report. As I said, I believe that there must be integration between or
among datasets. Otherwise, it is difficult to account for the damages.
There was no other indication of a separate cause - only the deletion
of the i.fpt file.
Allen Mellen wrote:
>
> Marilyn Symonds wrote:
> > I removed Booth_i.fpt which contained 849 kb for which I could not find an attachment to a person or an event. This action caused damage in four other dataSETS in many different kinds of files, other than fpt files.
>
> Really? You removed a file in the Booth_?.TMG dataset. Are you saying that other datasets, covering other groups of people, were affected? If they showed up as damaged, I do not believe the damage was caused by the deletion of that one file. Datasets are not intertwined with each other. As Lee has indicated, the entire dataset consists of files that reference each other, and thus are intertwined.
>
> > As a consequence, I can certainly accept the accuracy of
> >the statement that individual dataSETs are intertwined, and I am led
> >to the conclusion that the protective curtain around each dataSET does not exist. Is this conclusion consistent with your explanation of the relationship between dataSET and dataBASE?
This thread: