Lynn Pettis (4/7/2010)

---

Okay, I have read ahead and will heed the warnings. I'll stop.

sknox (4/7/2010)

---

What's MORE important is how NULLS improve queries and and designs when used properly and when necessary. Sadly that's usually the exception...

Oleg Netchaev (4/7/2010)

---

Msg 0, Level 11, State 0, Line 0

A severe error occurred on the current command. The results, if any, should be discarded

RBarryYoung (4/7/2010)

---

Paul:

Now I'm curious to know how you did on mine...? (here: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/questions/T-SQL/63632/) Its still got one of the lowest correct percentages that I know of.

Toreador (4/7/2010)

---

Is there any situation where setting ansi_nulls off is a good idea?

TheSQLGuru (4/7/2010)

---

BAH!! I don't need no stinkin' TESTS!! I KNOW my code will run faster than my client's did!!! :w00t: 😀 😎

bobmclaren (4/7/2010)

---

I'm liking the idea of populating permanent tables using bcp and truncate to minimize logging.

Think I'll give that a shot.

Dave Ballantyne (4/7/2010)

---

Paul White NZ (4/7/2010)

My guess is procedure cache bloat due to ad-hoc queries.

Which reminds me , ive still got a half finished blog on forced parametrization hanging around.

WayneS (4/7/2010)

---

I see Jason'sPaul's QOD is still running 47%, w/ 1250 attempts.