odd TEXT type field problem

Hi,
There is a db with 200GB, with ~160 GB data in it. Most of the data was a
TEXT type field in a table. That field has been dropped and added back with
default NULL but it appears I still have ~160 GB of data.
How is that possible?
updatestats would help?
The table in question has a two field composite clustered index, but not on
the TEXT type field.
The truth is the whole thing is very fragmented. Defragmenting the clustered
index would place exclusive lock on the table?
Your help would be appreciated,
JanosYou can try running DBCC CLEANTABLE on the table that had the TEXT column.
Look up syntax in BOL.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
--
"Janos Horanszky" <kob_uki@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:emmBIbZEFHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> There is a db with 200GB, with ~160 GB data in it. Most of the data was a
> TEXT type field in a table. That field has been dropped and added back
with
> default NULL but it appears I still have ~160 GB of data.
> How is that possible?
> updatestats would help?
> The table in question has a two field composite clustered index, but not
on
> the TEXT type field.
> The truth is the whole thing is very fragmented. Defragmenting the
clustered
> index would place exclusive lock on the table?
> Your help would be appreciated,
> Janos
>|||I appreciate Adam, I will try it on our test environment, I let you know
asap.
Janos
"Adam Machanic" <amachanic@.hotmail._removetoemail_.com> wrote in message
news:eDFFq6dEFHA.1012@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> You can try running DBCC CLEANTABLE on the table that had the TEXT column.
> Look up syntax in BOL.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
> --
>
> "Janos Horanszky" <kob_uki@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:emmBIbZEFHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> with
> on
> clustered
>