Interesting. I took Hugo's word for it and didn't bother to test it.

I like most people thought that truncating the table should work also. Good question, thanks.

I got this one wrong. I can live with that.

Ray Laubert (6/17/2009)

---

Just goes to show that your mind sees what it wants to see. I read this three times before posting just to make sure I wasn't missing...

Interesting, I didn't know you could do that.

You might want to look here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179331(SQL.90).aspx

I agree, especially with the spoiler on IGNORE_DUP_KEY which was bound to trip some people up. ...

I don't think any of the answers that include varchar or nvarchar can be correct.

But the question provoked an interesting discussion.

Chris Harshman (4/21/2009)

---

I think that would have made the question worth the 2 points...

Seems to me that the answer should have been SQL Server Express with Advanced Services but I too was confused by the "edition" of the database.

I think you need to show us where the '-' as an except operator exists in the Transact SQL Reference.

When I attempt to put a user database in Read_Only when it is in use, the process hangs waiting for the database to be freed up. I would...

Even though BOL says it can be done, I tried it on Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2050 Enterprise Edition and it fails there also.

Yes, despite the whining from the first couple of pages, it uncovered some interesting information.

I guess the moral of the story is do not rely on implicit type conversions.