Xref: alice comp.databases.oracle.server:56424 Path: alice!news-feed.fnsi.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!inet16.us.oracle.com!not-for-mail From: clbeck@us.oracle.com (Christopher Beck) Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server Subject: Re: Job queue Question Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 22:03:15 GMT Organization: Oracle Corp. Lines: 32 Message-ID: <378bcc44.31837499@inet16.us.oracle.com> References: <7m09v5$m3u$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3783BC90.13853FC8@nau.edu> Reply-To: clbeck@us.oracle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: inet16.us.oracle.com 931385028 23800 138.1.120.248 (7 Jul 1999 22:03:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@inet16.us.oracle.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jul 1999 22:03:48 GMT X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 On Wed, 07 Jul 1999 13:46:08 -0700, Glen Upreti wrote: >I don't think that the interval of sysdate +1 will be really good, >because I think it might start to slide, that is set itself to the >sysdate of whenever the job completes plus 24 hours which means that if >your job takes 1/2 an hour then then next_date will be 6:30 tommorrow >and then after that 7;00 the next day etc... This is not correct. The interval is evaluated immediately before the job starts executing. But you are correct that the job may "slide". But, this is a function of both the number of job_queue_processes you have and the interval that they wake up at, as pointed out by Jurij Modic in a follow up to my initial posting to this thread. ( Thanks again Jurij for catching my omission of '+1' in the interval ). chris. -- Christopher Beck Oracle Corporation clbeck@us.oracle.com Reston, VA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Opinions are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Oracle Corporation