Yes I agree. When "S" wasn't there I went looking for the correct answer.

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

Does it work this way because the original select and final select are within a transaction? Or does that matter?

Wouldn't the last select hang waiting for the pending commit or rollback?

I chose the correct answer because I felt it was most correct. But the way I read it was that if you had READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT set to on, it would...

A great question that makes you think. But we need to fix the typo in...

I am sure that Steve will correct this when he gets a chance to review it.

Ninja's_RGR'us (2/10/2009)

Not since 6.5. ...

I agree Lynn. Many times the discussion is as or more informative than the question. The point is to learn from the exchange.

Good change. Since a select into can cause some undesirable locking behavior it probably wouldn't be the best way to accomplish the task.

Yes, that makes sense since there is no way to take a table offline like you can in Oracle.

I guess it is a way to take the table offline while preparing to do something with it. That's all I can think of.

According to the guidelines, inserts will fail also. I agree, I am not sure why you would ever want to disable the clustered index. I can't...

That was the way I read it also. It doesn't explicitly say in BOL that it applies data changes to the Subscriber but from reading the description it seems...

If the Merge agent does not apply data changes to the Subscriber, then what does? There is not Distribution Agent in Merge Replication, is there?