Post reply

Database Job Schedules

  • December 30, 2008 at 11:05 pm

    #204572

    Comments posted to this topic are about the item Database Job Schedules

  • December 31, 2008 at 12:28 am

    #919468

    Hi

    I am unable to find the sp or command like sp_update_schedule

    i have searched it in sql 2005 & 2000 but there is no procedure with this name

    i got the procedure sp_update_jobschedule with @name parameter

    Regards,

    Yousaf khan

  • December 31, 2008 at 5:52 am

    #919566

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187354(SQL.90).aspx

  • December 31, 2008 at 6:41 am

    #919598

    Good question!

    The Redneck DBA

  • December 31, 2008 at 7:11 am

    #919623

    Thanks Jason. And yes, it IS addictive. I can't get enough of this site.

  • December 31, 2008 at 7:47 am

    #919647

    :unsure: another good question with bad answer choices unfortunately.

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178560(SQL.90).aspx

    says: "sp_update_jobschedule is provided for backward compatibility only" so it still works, just Microsoft in their infinite wisdom decided to change it along with a number of other low level plumbing items in SQL Server between 2000 and 2005. Seeing how many people selected sp_update_jobschedue looks like I'm not the only one who fell into the trap, and I try not to cheat when answering these questions, just go on the knowledge that's already in my head.

  • December 31, 2008 at 8:43 am

    #919698

    The point of the question was to get folks to learn about the fact that while sp_update_jobschedule is available, it is not the best answer, as it is only available for backward compatibility purposes. That's why the question included the critical phrase "(even beyond SQL Server 2008)", which was intended to trigger the notion that a change is in the air.

    Chris, folks on my team had the same reaction, so I've been expecting this for a few weeks. I really appreciate the feedback. And as someone who has also felt "duped" by bad answer choices, I am wholly appreciative of your concerns. However, I hope you'll agree that the ability to manipulate schedules independent of jobs is a great feature in SQL Server 2005.

  • January 1, 2009 at 3:11 am

    #919916

    After a long time a excellent question... 🙂

  • January 2, 2009 at 3:14 pm

    #920578

    Good question, pointing out the change in stored procedure name.

    Not to sound as though a direct update of system tables ever would be a good idea, I do wonder if updating msdb.dbo.sysjobschedules.next_run_time would have made the job run at 21:00. Again, I ask only for insight as to the under-the-hood operation of the scheduler.

  • January 6, 2009 at 8:39 am

    #921842

    jdshabat has a great point in that he devised the question to show the change.

    Chris, you are tackling the questions correctly, use your memory and see if you know. However if you get it wrong, it's not a competition in that you aren't competent. It's a competition in that if you know the trivia here, you get it right.

    I doubt many people know this, but the point of the QOD here is to bring it to your attention that this proc has been introduced as the new way to manage schedules.

  • June 3, 2009 at 10:51 am

    #1004176

    The question was what to do , so that we can update the schedule;

    Not what is the best choice.

    So the answer " Run the job manually, then run msdb.dbo.sp_update_jobschedule " is on my opinion a good answer.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply