Incorrect Results -- is a hotfix available?

I have a query that is returning incorrect results. It is reproducible on
SQL 2000 SP4 (version 2040) and SP3a (version 760). It tried on 6 different
machines, all with different operating systems/hardware/etc.
Is there a hotfix available?
The following should not return any rows, but 1 row is returned:
declare @.fg table (FK1 int, FK2 int, FK3 int, FK4 int)
insert into @.fg
select 4, 4, 798, 13734
declare @.dg table (ID int, C1 varchar(20))
insert into @.dg
select 4, 'AAA'
declare @.drg table (C1 varchar(20))
insert into @.drg
select 'AAA'
declare @.fgt table (ID int, C1 char(1))
insert into @.fgt
select 4, 'F'
declare @.dwf table (ID int, FK1 int, FK2 int)
insert into @.dwf
select 798, 4, 46
declare @.f table (ID int)
insert into @.f
select 46
declare @.dwc table (ID int)
insert into @.dwc
select 4
select ID = 1
from @.fg fg
inner join @.dg dg on dg.ID = fg.FK1
inner join @.drg drg on drg.C1 = isnull(dg.C1, '')
inner join @.fgt fgt on fgt.ID = fg.FK2
inner join @.dwf dwf on dwf.ID = fg.FK3
inner join @.dwc dwc on dwc.ID = dwf.FK1
inner join @.f f on f.id = dwf.FK2
left join (select ID = 1, FK1 = 1234) ag on ag.ID = fg.FK4
left join (select ID = 1, C1 = '') dt on dt.ID = ag.FK1
inner join (select C1 = 1) c1 on c1.C1 = 1
inner join (select C2 = 1) c2 on c2.C2 = 1
where
isnull(dt.C1, '') = 'XYZ'This produces 0 rows on SQL Server 2005 (build 1399) and on SQL Server 2000
(build 2151 and build 2162).
You might want to see which (if any) specific hotfix references this issue.
See http://www.aspfaq.com/sql2000builds.asp
#2162 was available publicly until Friday or so, it was pulled due to a
couple of pretty serious issues. I noticed at least one of those issues on
#2151 also, which I am currently running, so please only try to obtain the
absolute highest build number you need, especially if you use a failover
cluster and/or rely on BULK INSERT.
Based on a quick scan, looks like the build # you need is 2145, but I did
not read the KB articles in full.
A
"davedave" <davedave@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:54BCCA28-6F9C-484D-976C-F357D2BF7D07@.microsoft.com...
>I have a query that is returning incorrect results. It is reproducible on
> SQL 2000 SP4 (version 2040) and SP3a (version 760). It tried on 6
> different
> machines, all with different operating systems/hardware/etc.
> Is there a hotfix available?
> The following should not return any rows, but 1 row is returned:
> declare @.fg table (FK1 int, FK2 int, FK3 int, FK4 int)
> insert into @.fg
> select 4, 4, 798, 13734
> declare @.dg table (ID int, C1 varchar(20))
> insert into @.dg
> select 4, 'AAA'
> declare @.drg table (C1 varchar(20))
> insert into @.drg
> select 'AAA'
> declare @.fgt table (ID int, C1 char(1))
> insert into @.fgt
> select 4, 'F'
> declare @.dwf table (ID int, FK1 int, FK2 int)
> insert into @.dwf
> select 798, 4, 46
> declare @.f table (ID int)
> insert into @.f
> select 46
> declare @.dwc table (ID int)
> insert into @.dwc
> select 4
> select ID = 1
> from @.fg fg
> inner join @.dg dg on dg.ID = fg.FK1
> inner join @.drg drg on drg.C1 = isnull(dg.C1, '')
> inner join @.fgt fgt on fgt.ID = fg.FK2
> inner join @.dwf dwf on dwf.ID = fg.FK3
> inner join @.dwc dwc on dwc.ID = dwf.FK1
> inner join @.f f on f.id = dwf.FK2
> left join (select ID = 1, FK1 = 1234) ag on ag.ID = fg.FK4
> left join (select ID = 1, C1 = '') dt on dt.ID = ag.FK1
> inner join (select C1 = 1) c1 on c1.C1 = 1
> inner join (select C2 = 1) c2 on c2.C2 = 1
> where
> isnull(dt.C1, '') = 'XYZ'
>

Incorrect behavior in 'NOT IN' subquery with OPENXML

In SQL Server 200 SP4 I'm trying to use an OPENXML statement in a subquery.
However, this does not always return the desired result.
I've tried to simplify this problem and I've ended up with the sql script
below. In short, it creates a table with 200 records, select all records
except two specified in an xml document. When I run the complete script (in
the Query Analyzer) I get the desired results: 198 records. But when I first
run the part of the script where the table is created and filled (up to the
line of dashes), end then run the rest of the script where the xml is
prepared and the query is executed I get another result: 200 records.
I tried this script on two different Sql Server 2000 SP4 machines, both have
the same behavior. But this behavior seems incorrect to me.
So my questions:
- Does anybody get the correct result when you execute this script in parts?
- I this behavior indeed indeed incorrect or am I not thinking straight?
- Or could this be a bug in SQL Server...?
Thanks for your help!
Some remarks:
- When the table contains 160 records or less I get the correct result.
- When I use an 'IN' subquery (so without the NOT) I always get the correct
result (so the two specified records are returned both in the 'IN' as in the
'NOT IN' subquery...).
- When I run the subquery separately it returns the expected result: two
rows with values 1 and 2.
SET NOCOUNT ON
IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.sysobjects WHERE id =
OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[Test]') AND OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
TestId int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY
)
DECLARE @.Value int
SET @.Value = 1
WHILE @.Value <= 200
BEGIN
INSERT INTO Test (TestId) VALUES (@.Value)
SET @.Value = @.Value + 1
END

DECLARE @.Xml nvarchar(4000)
DECLARE @.XmlHandle int
SET @.Xml = N'<Root><Row><ID>1</ID></Row><Row><ID>2</ID></Row></Root>'
EXEC sp_xml_preparedocument @.XmlHandle OUTPUT, @.Xml
SELECT TestId
FROM Test
WHERE TestId NOT IN (
SELECT TestId
FROM OPENXML(@.XmlHandle, '/Root/Row')
WITH (
TestIdint'ID'
)
)
ORDER BY TestId
EXEC sp_xml_removedocument @.XmlHandle
DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
SET NOCOUNT OFF
I have tried both in SQL Server 2005 and got the same result (198 rows). I
don't have an SP4 installation on my machine, but asked our test team to
investigate. It may take a couple of days though until we can get back to
you...
Best regards
Michael
"Wouter de Boer" <a789nonymous[AT]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:277FA17E-7E50-4151-A034-99DF9221E99D@.microsoft.com...
> In SQL Server 200 SP4 I'm trying to use an OPENXML statement in a
> subquery.
> However, this does not always return the desired result.
> I've tried to simplify this problem and I've ended up with the sql script
> below. In short, it creates a table with 200 records, select all records
> except two specified in an xml document. When I run the complete script
> (in
> the Query Analyzer) I get the desired results: 198 records. But when I
> first
> run the part of the script where the table is created and filled (up to
> the
> line of dashes), end then run the rest of the script where the xml is
> prepared and the query is executed I get another result: 200 records.
> I tried this script on two different Sql Server 2000 SP4 machines, both
> have
> the same behavior. But this behavior seems incorrect to me.
> So my questions:
> - Does anybody get the correct result when you execute this script in
> parts?
> - I this behavior indeed indeed incorrect or am I not thinking straight?
> - Or could this be a bug in SQL Server...?
> Thanks for your help!
> Some remarks:
> - When the table contains 160 records or less I get the correct result.
> - When I use an 'IN' subquery (so without the NOT) I always get the
> correct
> result (so the two specified records are returned both in the 'IN' as in
> the
> 'NOT IN' subquery...).
> - When I run the subquery separately it returns the expected result: two
> rows with values 1 and 2.
>
> SET NOCOUNT ON
> IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.sysobjects WHERE id =
> OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[Test]') AND OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
> DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
> CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
> TestId int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY
> )
> DECLARE @.Value int
> SET @.Value = 1
> WHILE @.Value <= 200
> BEGIN
> INSERT INTO Test (TestId) VALUES (@.Value)
> SET @.Value = @.Value + 1
> END
>
> ----
>
> DECLARE @.Xml nvarchar(4000)
> DECLARE @.XmlHandle int
> SET @.Xml = N'<Root><Row><ID>1</ID></Row><Row><ID>2</ID></Row></Root>'
> EXEC sp_xml_preparedocument @.XmlHandle OUTPUT, @.Xml
> SELECT TestId
> FROM Test
> WHERE TestId NOT IN (
> SELECT TestId
> FROM OPENXML(@.XmlHandle, '/Root/Row')
> WITH (
> TestId int 'ID'
> )
> )
> ORDER BY TestId
> EXEC sp_xml_removedocument @.XmlHandle
> DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
> SET NOCOUNT OFF
>
>
|||We checked it against SQL 2000 SP3a and SP4. First the good news: SP4 seems
to work fine in either case.
When running it under SP3a: we observed:
1) run whole script - gets 198 rows (only one Remote Scan involved)
2) run create/fill 'Test' table first, and then OpenXML part, get 200 rows
(wrong behavior, two Remote Scans involved).
We seem to be able to correct this by setting "set ansi_nulls off".
Can you please check with select @.@.version what version number you are
running? And if you see version 8.00.2039 can you please tell us how you
installed it?
Thanks
Michael
"Michael Rys [MSFT]" <mrys@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u6dGBzyZFHA.3568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have tried both in SQL Server 2005 and got the same result (198 rows). I
>don't have an SP4 installation on my machine, but asked our test team to
>investigate. It may take a couple of days though until we can get back to
>you...
> Best regards
> Michael
> "Wouter de Boer" <a789nonymous[AT]hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:277FA17E-7E50-4151-A034-99DF9221E99D@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Before posting I checked @.@.VERSION and since it mentioned SP4 I figured I had
SQL Server 2000 SP4. Only now did I read it a bit better to see we're running
2000 SP3:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 16:08:15
Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Edition on Windows
NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)
(Sorry, I got fooled by the "Service Pack 4" at the end... :-$ )
The "set ansi_nulls off" indeed seems to correct this issue.
I did find another way of circumventing this behavior: inserting the values
from the xml into a temporary table and using that temporary table in the
subquery.
In any case: I understand that this behavior is corrected in the next SP, so
that's good. And of course thank you for your time and help with this matter.
Regards,
Wouter

Incorrect behavior in 'NOT IN' subquery with OPENXML

In SQL Server 200 SP4 I'm trying to use an OPENXML statement in a subquery.
However, this does not always return the desired result.
I've tried to simplify this problem and I've ended up with the sql script
below. In short, it creates a table with 200 records, select all records
except two specified in an xml document. When I run the complete script (in
the Query Analyzer) I get the desired results: 198 records. But when I first
run the part of the script where the table is created and filled (up to the
line of dashes), end then run the rest of the script where the xml is
prepared and the query is executed I get another result: 200 records.
I tried this script on two different Sql Server 2000 SP4 machines, both have
the same behavior. But this behavior seems incorrect to me.
So my questions:
- Does anybody get the correct result when you execute this script in parts?
- I this behavior indeed indeed incorrect or am I not thinking straight?
- Or could this be a bug in SQL Server...?
Thanks for your help!
Some remarks:
- When the table contains 160 records or less I get the correct result.
- When I use an 'IN' subquery (so without the NOT) I always get the correct
result (so the two specified records are returned both in the 'IN' as in the
'NOT IN' subquery...).
- When I run the subquery separately it returns the expected result: two
rows with values 1 and 2.
SET NOCOUNT ON
IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.sysobjects WHERE id =
OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[Test]') AND OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
TestId int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY
)
DECLARE @.Value int
SET @.Value = 1
WHILE @.Value <= 200
BEGIN
INSERT INTO Test (TestId) VALUES (@.Value)
SET @.Value = @.Value + 1
END
----
DECLARE @.Xml nvarchar(4000)
DECLARE @.XmlHandle int
SET @.Xml = N'<Root><Row><ID>1</ID></Row><Row><ID>2</ID></Row></Root>'
EXEC sp_xml_preparedocument @.XmlHandle OUTPUT, @.Xml
SELECT TestId
FROM Test
WHERE TestId NOT IN (
SELECT TestId
FROM OPENXML(@.XmlHandle, '/Root/Row')
WITH (
TestId int 'ID'
)
)
ORDER BY TestId
EXEC sp_xml_removedocument @.XmlHandle
DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
SET NOCOUNT OFFI have tried both in SQL Server 2005 and got the same result (198 rows). I
don't have an SP4 installation on my machine, but asked our test team to
investigate. It may take a couple of days though until we can get back to
you...
Best regards
Michael
"Wouter de Boer" <a789nonymous[AT]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:277FA17E-7E50-4151-A034-99DF9221E99D@.microsoft.com...
> In SQL Server 200 SP4 I'm trying to use an OPENXML statement in a
> subquery.
> However, this does not always return the desired result.
> I've tried to simplify this problem and I've ended up with the sql script
> below. In short, it creates a table with 200 records, select all records
> except two specified in an xml document. When I run the complete script
> (in
> the Query Analyzer) I get the desired results: 198 records. But when I
> first
> run the part of the script where the table is created and filled (up to
> the
> line of dashes), end then run the rest of the script where the xml is
> prepared and the query is executed I get another result: 200 records.
> I tried this script on two different Sql Server 2000 SP4 machines, both
> have
> the same behavior. But this behavior seems incorrect to me.
> So my questions:
> - Does anybody get the correct result when you execute this script in
> parts?
> - I this behavior indeed indeed incorrect or am I not thinking straight?
> - Or could this be a bug in SQL Server...?
> Thanks for your help!
> Some remarks:
> - When the table contains 160 records or less I get the correct result.
> - When I use an 'IN' subquery (so without the NOT) I always get the
> correct
> result (so the two specified records are returned both in the 'IN' as in
> the
> 'NOT IN' subquery...).
> - When I run the subquery separately it returns the expected result: two
> rows with values 1 and 2.
>
> SET NOCOUNT ON
> IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.sysobjects WHERE id =
> OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[Test]') AND OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
> DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
> CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
> TestId int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY
> )
> DECLARE @.Value int
> SET @.Value = 1
> WHILE @.Value <= 200
> BEGIN
> INSERT INTO Test (TestId) VALUES (@.Value)
> SET @.Value = @.Value + 1
> END
>
> ----
>
> DECLARE @.Xml nvarchar(4000)
> DECLARE @.XmlHandle int
> SET @.Xml = N'<Root><Row><ID>1</ID></Row><Row><ID>2</ID></Row></Root>'
> EXEC sp_xml_preparedocument @.XmlHandle OUTPUT, @.Xml
> SELECT TestId
> FROM Test
> WHERE TestId NOT IN (
> SELECT TestId
> FROM OPENXML(@.XmlHandle, '/Root/Row')
> WITH (
> TestId int 'ID'
> )
> )
> ORDER BY TestId
> EXEC sp_xml_removedocument @.XmlHandle
> DROP TABLE [dbo].[Test]
> SET NOCOUNT OFF
>
>|||We checked it against SQL 2000 SP3a and SP4. First the good news: SP4 seems
to work fine in either case.
When running it under SP3a: we observed:
1) run whole script - gets 198 rows (only one Remote Scan involved)
2) run create/fill 'Test' table first, and then OpenXML part, get 200 rows
(wrong behavior, two Remote Scans involved).
We seem to be able to correct this by setting "set ansi_nulls off".
Can you please check with select @.@.version what version number you are
running? And if you see version 8.00.2039 can you please tell us how you
installed it?
Thanks
Michael
"Michael Rys [MSFT]" <mrys@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u6dGBzyZFHA.3568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have tried both in SQL Server 2005 and got the same result (198 rows). I
>don't have an SP4 installation on my machine, but asked our test team to
>investigate. It may take a couple of days though until we can get back to
>you...
> Best regards
> Michael
> "Wouter de Boer" <a789nonymous[AT]hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:277FA17E-7E50-4151-A034-99DF9221E99D@.microsoft.com...
>|||Before posting I checked @.@.VERSION and since it mentioned SP4 I figured I ha
d
SQL Server 2000 SP4. Only now did I read it a bit better to see we're runnin
g
2000 SP3:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 16:08:15
Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Edition on Windows
NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)
(Sorry, I got fooled by the "Service Pack 4" at the end... :-$ )
The "set ansi_nulls off" indeed seems to correct this issue.
I did find another way of circumventing this behavior: inserting the values
from the xml into a temporary table and using that temporary table in the
subquery.
In any case: I understand that this behavior is corrected in the next SP, so
that's good. And of course thank you for your time and help with this matter
.
Regards,
Wouter

Inconsistent sp_spaceused

SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
name rows reserved data index_size
unused
-- -- -- -- --
--
table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
2184 KB
How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?Check out DBCC UPDATEUSAGE and the ROWS_COUNT option.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> name rows reserved data index_size
> unused
> -- -- -- -- --
> --
> table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> 2184 KB
> How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?|||Nope, didn't help a bit: still shows 0 records yet roughly 7MB of taken space.
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Check out DBCC UPDATEUSAGE and the ROWS_COUNT option.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> > SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> >
> > sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> >
> > name rows reserved data index_size
> > unused
> > -- -- -- -- --
> > --
> > table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> > 2184 KB
> >
> > How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?
>
>|||Leon Shargorodsky,
if you dropped a variable length column, you can reclaim the space using
"dbcc cleantable".
If it is a heap (table without clustered index), create a clustered index
and if you do not want to keep it then drop it.
If it is not a heap, use "dbcc dbreindex" or "alter index ... rebuild" if
you are using 2005.
AMB
"Leon Shargorodsky" wrote:
> Nope, didn't help a bit: still shows 0 records yet roughly 7MB of taken space.
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> > Check out DBCC UPDATEUSAGE and the ROWS_COUNT option.
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> > > SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> > >
> > > sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> > >
> > > name rows reserved data index_size
> > > unused
> > > -- -- -- -- --
> > > --
> > > table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> > > 2184 KB
> > >
> > > How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?
> >
> >
> >|||sp_spaceused is not guaranteed to provide actual, up-to-the-minute correct
values. DO NOT rely on it for such.
--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> name rows reserved data index_size
> unused
> -- -- -- -- --
> --
> table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> 2184 KB
> How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?

Inconsistent sp_spaceused

SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
name rows reserved data index_size
unused
-- -- -- -- --
--
table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
2184 KB
How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?Check out DBCC UPDATEUSAGE and the ROWS_COUNT option.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in me
ssage
news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> name rows reserved data index_size
> unused
> -- -- -- -- --
--
> --
> table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> 2184 KB
> How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?|||Nope, didn't help a bit: still shows 0 records yet roughly 7MB of taken spac
e.
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

> Check out DBCC UPDATEUSAGE and the ROWS_COUNT option.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Leon Shargorodsky,
if you dropped a variable length column, you can reclaim the space using
"dbcc cleantable".
If it is a heap (table without clustered index), create a clustered index
and if you do not want to keep it then drop it.
If it is not a heap, use "dbcc dbreindex" or "alter index ... rebuild" if
you are using 2005.
AMB
"Leon Shargorodsky" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Nope, didn't help a bit: still shows 0 records yet roughly 7MB of taken sp
ace.
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||sp_spaceused is not guaranteed to provide actual, up-to-the-minute correct
values. DO NOT rely on it for such.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:A1FBD362-9CB9-41F1-A57A-6662C4BFF5A8@.microsoft.com...
> SQL 2000 Enterprise, SP4, 8.00.2175
> sp_spaceused 'table', @.updateusage = 'TRUE' returns this:
> name rows reserved data index_size
> unused
> -- -- -- -- --
--
> --
> table 0 7248 KB 5032 KB 32 KB
> 2184 KB
> How come my table has 0 records yet still occupies space?