Rob Green wondered what on earth Rich Gorin was talking about when he wrote 
to Rob Green
 RG> This is not really very efficient for a relational database.  
 RG> Barring some unusual circumstances, the best way to store 
 RG> that information would be a table that would have 3 fields.  
 RG> Field 1 would be the entity identifier (customer number or 
 RG> whatever, that you would have had anyway), and would relate 
 RG> back to your master table; Field 2 would be a field number 
 RG> and would be a small integer that would handle your 
 RG> subscripts.  Field 3 would contain the data.  The first two 
 RG> fields would be key fields, i.e. their contents jointly would 
 RG> define a unique record.  
 RG> If there are 50 fields in your array, each entity could have up 
 RG> to 50 records, but if some were blank or zero, there would be 
 RG> no reason to create those records.
Thanks.  You have opened the door and turned on a light for me to proceed 
with.
--- msgedsq 2.1
---------------