It's a misunderstanding that the logfile wil stay small in single recovery mode. De logfile will be as big as a single transaction. So if you do an update on...

I found this article at Microsoft which comes pretty close:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/multisec.mspx

I know this can be fixed by a clustered index, but I want to see what the situation is before I add this index (I'm struggeling with application administrators for...

15TB is not a size to run a "regular" backup, or a fuzzy backuptool with build-in compression. That's impossible to do with that size. You need to change the concept...

exec sp_detach_db ...

exec master.xp_cmdshell 'move ...'

exec sp_attach_db ...

Or do you need a more detailled answer?

data is accessed directly

run a dbcc updateusage({databasename}) to fix inaccuracies caused by sql 2000. This inaccuracy won't happen on 2005, but if you migrate a database to 2005, you have to run this...

do a dbcc updateusage() first

reindex

and finally update statistics

great work! thanks

The only thing what could happen is that an index is gone, no data corruption. Don't you have an test environment?

To be sure: to save your indexes, let Enterprise manager...

Yes, that's the way I do it right now. But I think there must be a way to determine the procedurename. If SQL can tell you the name if...

Here's a space saving tip for your backups: enable the compression flag on the directory where you put your backups (not your mdf/ndf/ldf). It will give some CPU overhead (compression),...

That's a good one! Is seems Microsoft onnly implemented the @resample option :hehe:

However, it's possible to create a modified sp_updatestats (with the fullscan option). The sourcecode for sp_updatestats is not...

wait till MSSQL2008 🙂

(don't get angry on me, I think a lot of people had the same question)

To my opinion, multiple instances are only useful if you want to prioritize databases. Each instance has it's own settings for memory and CPU usage. So if you're in the...