Are your reports using stored procedures as their source?  If so this sounds like a classic situation where you need to recompile your sp's, maybe even alter them to include the...

Although none of the posts are technically incorrect, they are also incomplete in my estimation.  You should understand the consequences of using these methods. 

If you set the database to...

If I may...  During a full backup all data pages (both "data" and "log") are fully backed up.  Unlike a Backup Log operation, the transaction log is NOT truncated even...

I guess I didn't make my point clearly.  No it isn't a naming convention problem per se, but the SQL Server scheduler makes no guarantee about the exact time events...

Because I think everyone is entitled to my opinion...

The sql_variant data type is an abomination!  I have never used it and I hope I...

It's a variation on the same basic theme.  In our case we required at least the year, and if the day was specified we required the month.  If the requirements...

OK, I suspect what you are seeing is the effects of the WAITFOR command rather than some problem with the isolation level.

If you eliminate the WAITFOR command in Tran 1...

Isn't that essentially what I said?  I just clarified that my preference would be that the column be a datetime data type rather than varchar or anything else.  If you...

Well, if you have a 1+1 "Active/Passive" cluster setup you have one server that is actually doing work and one that is doing nothing but waiting for the other one...

Since you are determined to do this the hard way...  Repeatable read would work if your WAITFOR statement was AFTER the INSERT statement.  There is no need in this case...

The benefit of using the n+1 cluster where n>1 is that it allows you to more effectively use a greater percentage of your hardware resources.  Effectively a 1+1 Active/Passive setup...

This also serves as a very good illustration of why DRI is better than "application enforced RI"  You are including a bunch of logic to accomplish what SQL Server can...

I would also add that Windows 2003 has essentially the same issue.  Here is an article explaining the details: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;817064

A Marks and I Marks do address some of the issues with SQL NULLs but before the end of his life, Dr. Codd had changed his mind about the acceptability...

Yes, it does.  XP disables distributed transactions across the network by default.  See http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=839279 for details and how to fix the problem.