It is a usual practice for SQL coders to put a default date like this if they don't have a valid date, does sysprocesses table does the same thing ?Hi
It is not the best, but this table dates back to when SQL Server was produced by Sybase. A long history of backward-compatability. Microsoft has changed the system tables in SQL Server 2005 (sys.dm_exec_sessions in this case)
Regards
Mike|||No, this is not the way I would have done it. This is a token date, which
more or less means the engine is saying, I don't have information about when
this process started. I would rather see NULL here, though the engine
should be able to figure out when it first saw this process (?). I can see
novice DBAs reaching for the panic button, hey, this process has been
running for over a century, we'd better kill it!
news:b9193c83-2128-40b6-8023-67fac4611e91@.discussions.microsoft.com... >I was trying to findout processes which are running for long time and > came across few entries in sysprocess where Last_Batch column shows > '01/01/1900' > > It is a usual practice for SQL coders to put a default date like this if > they don't have a valid date, does sysprocesses table does the same > thing ?[:(] >
No comments:
Post a Comment