Steps:

1) Create Job A. Set Job Inactive
2) Create Job B. In job B, add a Job/Task control that calls Job A.

Job A runs even though it is inactive. Is this supposed to work this way?

Thomas

Hi,

Looks to me you want the job to start. You could use add a condition for the task.
But.. you did set job A to inactive so you expect this job not to run. The inactivity is now more based on own triggers.

For both world is something to say.

Regards
Erik

---

Yes I can see that this can be viewed from two sides. But to me it seems more like a bug.

Think of it from a programming perspective: Lets say you have a c# method, and this method i referenced multiple places in your code. If you change this method, or delete it, this will affect all the places that call this method. So shouldn't jobs in VC work the same way?

I create a generic job A, and this job is being referenced multiple places (As a Job/Control task). If I change the code in job A, this will affect all the jobs that call this job. If I set the job inactive, it does not affect the jobs that call job A. Isn't that just a bug? Or am I missing something?

Thomas

It is a feature. Disabling a Task or Job prevents it from running in the normal Task Flow. But when you explicitly say you want to run that Task through Job/Task control Task you can override that. You should deactivate that Job/Task control Task if you do not override it.

---

I agree with this approach, otherwise there would be no way to call a disabled job without it being enabled

ok that s fine then . I personally think there should be no way of calling an inactive job (because it's inactive....). But if everyone else agrees it's a supposed to work this way, I'll leave it at that. Thanks for the input, you can close this one.

T

Sorry to bring up a month old topic. But I tend to agree with Thomas. Active/Inactive is great for it's normal job/task flow. But maybe there should be an extra option to 'flat out Disable' a job or task. At no point, even with right-clicking and selecting Run Job or Run Task, should that job/task run if the 'Disable' flag is set. When disabling, it would be nice to see a list of Flows or other tasks that call the job/task you're disabling with a confirmation of 'here's whats affected... are you sure'.

I understood the nature of the beas so it hasn't been of much concern to me. But it'd be nice to be able to stop something from a single place if you happen to reference it from multiple areas. Same thing with disabling a connection, or disabling a user account. Everything that can be used... it'd be nice to be able to also disable it for the time being (various reasons).

Brian

Have had a change of mind on this one. Disabling a job doesn't really mean much, more important is disabling the trigger.

I can see why disabling a job perhaps should mean disabling calls to it also otherwise what is the difference between disabling a job and disabling its triggers?