At 11/22/2017 05:34, Erik Hov wrote >What to do now?..... Before I think I can split anything I have another >problem (which may be no problem??)....I am doing some maintenance on the >people in my large project. (And to this job it is very convenient to have >the IDs I have done various reports to find ,and use them in my large >project where all the people are....): 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