Guy wrote: >2) Since Image logging is tied to user logging, and since >user logging has been around since dirt was invented, are >we all paying a performance hit for buried CM code? No, WRITELOG had been converted to NM with "new" locking and buffering scheme since release 3.0 or 3.1. The performance hit for Image logging should be minimum. One enhancement did fall through the crack. It was designed to have a trusted routine without parameter checking and probing, that WRITELOG intrinsic truns around calling after those checks. The idea is to have Image logging calling the trusted interface instead to save hundreds of instructions per call. Unfortunately the Image logging changes were either never submitted or had been rolled back accidently. It is not there today and no one remembered why. Depending on the record size and if DBXBEGIN is involved, this could speedup image logging by another 5%. The changes are minimum, just switch calls. Why do I care? It was my idea ...... Paul Wang phone: (408) 988-7378 SolutionSoft Systems, Inc. fax : (408) 988-4777 email: [log in to unmask]