February 23, 2009 at 8:58 am
How do we feel about performing SQL Maintenance through an enterprise wide scheduler like Autosys instead of SQL Server agent?
Since Autosys typically has a dedicated staff for 24*7 monitoring in Production environment that generate a call out; there are better chances of invoking support and relaying the problem-occurence in case primary ONCALL is hard-to-get. Also, the scheduler has a history that allows tracking job failures in the past ... although I wanted to make sure I am covering everything here and want to know if there are significant costs of doing this that outweigh the professed benefits.
February 24, 2009 at 7:11 am
Should this have been a poll? instead ....
February 25, 2009 at 7:30 am
I have fought this battle in a production environment before. For DBA's SQL Agent is easy because they have access to it and control over it but the Production Control people don't like it because it is a second thing for them to learn. If your company has settled on Autosys, I would have the DBA's set up their production jobs to be scheduled from Autosys so that you have a consistant environment. They won't like going through the change management process but who does?
Having the single production scheduler helps keep applications and maintenance tasks from walking on each other and keeps the notification, management and accountability processes easier.
I would however, let DBA's still schedule on-demand jobs in SQL Agent so that they can run background jobs on the servers as needed (on-demand backups/restores, db maintenance etc.). Just set policy that they can't schedule production jobs and only have the Production Control people worry about Autosys.
July 9, 2009 at 9:49 am
Can I set up maintenance plans in Management Studio and execute them from Autosys? I don't know where the plan files get stored or whether they are executable files.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply