DY> 29.04.2014 12:09, Mark Rotteveel wrote: >> If you look at SQL Server, there jobs themselves are not defined for a >> specific database (although they may depend on one or more databases). >> AFAIK they are stored in the master database. Execution requires an Agent >> service to be running.
DY> We neither have a master database, nor an agent service, nor database DY> links to access user dbs from a master one (or any other solution to DY> this issue). Shouldn't we think about something more realistic? Or at DY> least postpone scheduled tasks until we have a proper foundation built? DY> Dmitry I'm considering that "master database" would be used only to store the jobs information. A client/daemon would read it, create all the schedules and run the tasks at desired time (use of OS scheduler is an option too). Such "master database" (better call it jobs/tasks/scheduler database?) can be created and distributed with new installations (like the security2.fdb already is). If you don't worry about mixing things a bit, maybe even security2.fdb could be enhanced to store jobs data, avoiding the need to create a new pre-installed database. []s Carlos http://www.firebirdnews.org FireBase - http://www.FireBase.com.br ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available. Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
