>>I don't have the exact number right here but approximately the application has about 50 tables. The tables that have tags with UPPER() are fairly small (no more than 10K records). The largest table is about 200K records. Therefore my application is much smaller, on the scale of size of tables, than you have.
>
>Ok, this is the situation we had at a certain moment. But, this application has increased so fast in a matter of a few months that we are rushing to migrate everything to SQL Server, before we reach the 2GB limit. So, we have one table with one million records, another one with two million records. Just those two tables are the ones that are mostly used in all transactions. So, they are accessed all the time. Also, one has observed that recently, since we added a UPPER() tag on the first table that the problem has started. So, we might need to drop of that tag and its used for a few days to double check on that. Or, it could also be related to a tag problem such as recreating the tag in case something would have been wrong with it. But, so far, it seems to lead to the size of a table. This has just started recently so this is why I believe there is a factor here. At first, we thought that it could have been related to the number of users increasing on a daily basis. But, when the
>situation happens and there is nobody on the site, this could then not be related to it.

I have small size tables and I am also rushing to convert to SQL Server (not for the performance but mostly in order to make the application more markitable). From what you describe, the size of the tables (and correspondigly index tags) could be the cause.