Comments
Sort by recent activity
For anybody else who comes across this problem, in this case it was due to the databases being set to a compatibility level of SQL 2000. When I changed both to SQL 2008, the actual differences then appeared correctly in the report.
Bob, thank you for the reply. I checked that after seeing your reply, but it wasn't the problem.
-- Thom / comments
For anybody else who comes across this problem, in this case it was due to the databases being set to a compatibility level of SQL 2000. When I changed both to SQL 2008, the actual differences the...