> I can't really say, since I never really worried about how this was
> implemented until now. I saw a suggestion earlier today by Kim Madsen
> (author of kbMemTable) about using a different variant type. Do you think
> this would work? Would it create any other kind of problems?

I have no idea. I'm not overly experienced at working with variant
internals.

> Let me explain to you why I was trying to use IBO and MemTable together.

I

> am working, as you know, in a queue application. I'm using IBO for all my
> database work. It occurred to me that I could use, as many people do,
> MemTable to create a database abstraction layer that would allow me to

have

> all my GUI apps totally independent of the underlying server.
>
> I would then be at liberty to support other open source databases in the
> future. (More easily.) I am, also, interested in using MemTable in the
> creation of the 3-tier version of this application, since it has many
> features that would make this much easier.

This sounds like a perfectly sensible reason to use the mem-tables.

I suppose you will be looking forward to TIBODataset being able to handle a
unidirectional cursor...
It would be ideal if you could populate it using the TIB_Cursor but I
realize that it may not be the most convenient.

Regards,
Jason Wharton
CPS - Mesa AZ
http://www.ibobjects.com