I know I could be off, but that sure looks like homework.

If you post what you tried that didn't work, you're sure to get help. Just trolling for someone to...

"Should get paid" ?

I thought Steve was paying us for this?

Hey, get that guy over here...

😎

The key word and tricky phrase to take away from the description of this column in books online is: "... reuse of transaction log space..." This means that it will...

Me too. I've never heard the phrase "reuse logs" applied to SQL Server.

I mean, we "reuse" them all the time. The same log file is cleaned out, whether you're in...

If it's that severe, you might want to try "turning off" parallelism by setting the MAXDOP to 1 for the server, but it's just a band-aid at this point.

If this...

It's an advanced setting within the properties of the server. The default is usually zero.

This is the script from BOL

sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1;

GO

RECONFIGURE WITH OVERRIDE;

GO

sp_configure 'max degree of parallelism',...

ALTER DATABASE dbname

SET RECOVERY SIMPLE

2008 does have intellisense. So far, I've found RedGate's to be better.

That's just what I was going to point out. I even went & checked it in BOL.

No. This wouldn't be helpful to you at all. In fact, it would probably hurt performance.

You're operating under a slight misconception. FAST 'n' (or FASTFIRSTROW) doesn't give you faster response time. It gives you slower response time with the appearance of faster responses. The hint...

That's certainly not a ringing endorsement. Anything in particular force the change back?

Still sounds like you might want to try out VSDB.

First off, get out of the monolithic file. That's going to create headaches no matter what tool you use.

After that, talking about this stuff is almost like talking about religion...

Oh, one other option, you could look at increasing the Parallelism Threshold for the server so that it's less likely to put this query into a parallel operation. That's another...