L' Eomot Inversé (11/9/2011)
The correct answer rate is still only 9%, which I find surprising.
I must say that the low rate of correct answers surprises me. I intended this question to be a relatively easy first question in a series (hence the "1" in the title). I have already submitted the second one, and I won't change that - but I'll have to rethink the difficulty level of the remaining planned questions (that I did not submit yet).
Mostly a very good explanation, too, but I have one small cavil:
There is an index which supports the foreign key constraint, and indeed you are not permitted to create the foreign key constraint unless that index already exists when you try to create the foreign key; so it's wrong to say there is no such index. However, that index is not part of the table being discussed, but of the referenced table, and it's reasonable to assume that the question is about space for the table being discussed so that space for the index on the referenced table doesn't count, and thus this affects only the explanation and not the answer.
I think your remark about the explanation is a bit far-fetched - but I'll admit that one could
interpret the explanation that way.
Luckily, the text of my question explicitly includes "... used by the table
are true". So it is not only, as you say, reasonable to assume that the question is about space for the table being discussed - it is explicitly stated!
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server/Data Platform MVP (2006-2016)
Visit my SQL Server blog: http://sqlblog.com/blogs/hugo_kornelis