UpdateAllRecords Not Working Properly?

[Robert Brenstein]

>On 4/22/04 9:48 AM, "Cindy Brown" <cindy at kowhaiprogramming.com> wrote:
>
>>>  So all I need to do is change 1 record and then hit "updateallrecords" and
>>>  they'll all get the change? For example, if I get a cursor against 10
>>>  records and then set one field of the first record to a value, can I then
>>>  say "updateallrecords" and the other 9 will get the change?
>>
>>  As far as I know, yes, that's what will happen.
>
>Yes, Ken.
>
>With a little correction.
>
>You modify NOT first record.
>
>You modify just VALUES in RAM buffer.
>
>And when you do UpdateAll() all 10 records get that new value
>
>
>--
>Best regards,
>Ruslan Zasukhin      [ I feel the need...the need for speed ]

And the values of fields that were not changed in the buffer remain 
as they were for each record (and not copied from the currently 
loaded record).

Robert