Lee and Joyce , The 001, 002, 003 etc is OK ,but I am not sure about numbers in reference field. It is right you can find someone with the reference numbers after splitting the large project ,but if I have 17 different projects ,those reference-numbers will not be "all in one" ,so you will not be able to find every number you look for..... If it is possible to someway make reference numbers for each person with their IDs example 0000001, 0000002 etc it could be used for references ,but if that may cause total corruption ,I don`t know. (by the way ,do you have to input reference numbers manually?) I don`t want to corrupt my database more either ,so must find a good way of dealing with both the editing as well as the splitting. Lee , The maintenance mostly don`t add new people ,just editing on existing ones or finding duplicates ,and maybe added one person if I deleted one. I will try in the large project I have ,but I will follow the cdx size and I am taking backups each day now ,storing them on my computer and then transferring them to an external harddisk. (I wrote: ">also have some records to go through from TMG 4 and get them into TMG 9 >which includes......editing certain special letters after gedcom import >,children out of wedlock ,adopted ,stillbirths ,twins/triplets etc >,editing addresses ,burials.") No ,this hopefully will not add any more people ,just adjustments on their tags etc. But after doing a split ,then I guess several of those projects would have some of the same people because they also are related to others of my ancestors. So if I decided to enter more people to a known family in one project that I hadn`t entered children for before ,and I also have the same family in another project also without children.....then I had to enter the same children in each project these families were in?. if so ,that would mean I can`t add any more people to the projects even if it is room for many more? Yes ,it seems I have to split somehow ,and soon ,and I have thought splitting in first in 1 down to 2 x greatgrandparents and then 16 for each greatgreat grandparent. Where the split occurs also of course decide how many people the new projects will get. I think 16 would be OK.....32 would be a bit too many..... Think I might continue to edit from the old genealogyprograms and keep watching the cdx file size and of course taking backups daily (I have 127 backups of that large project from TMG 9). Would be nice knowing when and how to split the project though ,and any suggestions on reference numbers ,and if it is an easy way to do editing after splitting without having to switch between all the new projects!. If it is any way of automatically give each person a reference number without corrupting the project more ,and then split it ,maybe it could be possible to make a list of people/reference from each project with ID numbers and project names with output to excel ,and then collect all of them in one excel document?? That way it should be possible to know which project that has each number?..... Erik -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: TMG [mailto:[email protected]] På vegne av Joyce Sendt: 22. november 2017 15:43 Til: 'The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List' <[email protected]> Emne: Re: [TMG] 2Gb file limit Yes, it would be much easier to do editing of the current project knowing who needs maintenance than trying to "re-find" those persons in split-out projects. From what you say, much of this will likely give you some added wiggle room IF the maintenance doesn't add any more than you take away. I usually find that in this kind of maintenance that for each person deleted (usually through merging of duplicates) I wind up adding one or to persons. If that holds for you, the prognosis is not that good as it would soon get you closer to disaster. Still, I think I would try it. But, I would create Backups often so that I could get back to a "safe" place if corruption begins. >also have some records to go through from TMG 4 and get them into TMG 9 >which includes......editing certain special letters after gedcom import >,children out of wedlock ,adopted ,stillbirths ,twins/triplets etc >,editing addresses ,burials. If this involves adding new persons -- particularly new name records then I'd wait until I had split the project. This might well make it harder to process in that you'd have to bring them into v9 and then split them out to the new split projects. But that would be better than losing it all. >Anyway ,I agree that it is much better to split the project I have in >16+1 different projects than having all in one with over a million people. >But first ,I have to know what to do with that "editing problem"....!!. >Should I keep on with editing in the large project which is the easiest >or split up and letting it be harder to edit the ones I want to edit? Of course, you know your data much better than I, but I think I would try splitting into fewer projects. I usually advocate a single project rather than multiple projects as it _is_ much easier to maintain and there are no duplicates to maintain. But, when faced with a limit as in your case, it really is not a choice except where the split occurs. Splitting into fewer subsets _usually_ requires fewer duplicates. It also makes working on the new projects to be much closer in feel to that of the current single project. On the other hand, if there are fewer inter-marriages/interactions between families in more project, then the 16+1 may be the way to go. I like the idea of the one umbrella project leading to the other 16 (or however many subset) projects. At this point, I think all we can do is make suggestions as we don't really know your data. But, as I noted above, the one thing that is paramount is to make backup often. And good luck! Lee Joyce has a good idea here and also a good warning about how numbers are treated in the Reference field as opposed to how numbers are normally treated. You can get textual numbers sorted in the proper sequence IF all numbers have the same number of characters. You would do this by adding zeros prefixing the numbers -- like 001, 011, 012, 002, 021, 023, 003, etc. This would allow sorting to be normal. Of course, this makes it harder to automate plugging the ID# into the Reference Field. John Cardinal may be able to suggest something that would mitigate this problem using his TMG Utility. Lee Erik, You might consider using the Reference field to store each person's ID numbers. The Reference field is searchable using TMG's Search function (from the menu: Edit / Find a Person / Search by Reference Number). Then once you split the database you can still find someone with that search. It's also possible to include the reference number in the picklist (pull up the picklist and select the Options button)... the only issue there is that the reference number is an alpha-numeric field and sorts as text rather than as a number, so you would get an order like 1, 11, 111, 2, 21, 211, 3, etc... no good for sorting but might be handy for your purposes. I'm pretty sure there's a way to use John Cardinal's TMG Utility to get the ID numbers loaded into the Reference number field. I think it involves outputting your ID numbers using a TMG List of People report, then importing using a TMG Utility function. I don't know if doing that will expand the size of the large table and corrupt your database or not. It might be safer to do the import after splitting the database, just to keep from corrupting the database, but it would take a better expert than me to guide you through that process if you need help with it. Good luck with your database! Joyce Rivette

At 11/22/2017 10:58, Erik Hov wrote >It is right you can find someone with the reference numbers after splitting >the large project ,but if I have 17 different projects ,those >reference-numbers will not be "all in one" ,so you will not be able to find >every number you look for..... No, you make the change to the Reference Field _before_ splitting the project. >If it is possible to someway make reference numbers for each person with >their IDs example 0000001, 0000002 etc it could be used for references ,but >if that may cause total corruption ,I don`t know. (by the way ,do you have >to input reference numbers manually?) No, you can use the John Cardinal's TMG Utility using the procedure he described. >I don`t want to corrupt my database more either ,so must find a good way of >dealing with both the editing as well as the splitting. Make a backup, copy the ID#s to the Reference field using the TMG Utility and then check things to make sure there are no problems. I am not sure, but I don't think this will affect the N file (and its index) at all. The Reference field information is stored in a difference file. Something that has not been mentioned is whether you already make use of the Reference field. You may not have entries is every Reference field (I probably only use it for about a quarter of the people in my project). If you do, you could still do something similar by adding a Reference Tag with the ID# in the Tag Memo field. This would leave your current Reference field alone. Lee