Go Premium for a chance to win a PS4. Enter to Win


ok to leave SQLSERVERAGENT service running on 2003 Small business server

Posted on 2013-06-09
Medium Priority
Last Modified: 2013-06-09
I have a client that is running a SQL database on an 2003 SBS.
They have Symantec Backup EXEC 10 backing it up via an agent, but I'd like to create a backup job within SQLserver enterprise manager to do it's own scheduled backup.

When I use the wizard to create the backup job of the database I want to backup I get an popup that says "The sqlserveragent on target server '(local)' is stopped. Make sure it is running durning the scheduled execution of this job"
I looked in the services msc and that agent is set to manual. I tried setting it to automatic but the job didn't run.

Do I need to start the service and leave it running? If so, is there any downside to having it run 24x7
Question by:bwierzbicki
  • 3
  • 2
LVL 10

Expert Comment

by:Matt Bowler
ID: 39233525
No downside, typically SQL Agent runs alongside the SQL engine service. (although if you don't use it it doesn't have to be).

What I would caution though is that if these databases are in full recovery then having full backups taken by different mechanisms and located in different places will affect your recovery plan.

Author Comment

ID: 39233584
Thanks for you comment Matt
The reason I'm trying to do these backups from within SQL is that I think it would be easier disaster recovery.

I began reading what it would take to restore from the Symantec Backup Exec (BUEXEC) backups and it just seemed like a completed added step to get BUEXEC up and running before having a chance to restore the database.

I'd also like to leave the BUEXEC backups running for redundancy. My thoughts were that if a recovery was required I'd go the the SQLbackups first, since it is very easy to import them into another SQLSERVER. The BUEXEC backups would be there just in case.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "it will affect my recovery plan". Does running 2 database backups make one negate the other? Kinda like running 2 backups that rely on the archive bit make one or both ineffective?

I just looked and it is in full recovery mode.

At the moment I'm in the process of trying to come up with a recovery plan. My thoughts were to run this nightly. The option I'm selecting is "Database backup - backup the entire database"

If I do that type of backup from the wizard in Enterprise manager, shouldn't I be able to restore the database completely to the state it was in at the time of that database. I know with full recovery mode transaction logs are a consideration, but my understanding (limited as it is) is that those logs are only required to bring in uncommited transactions up to the point of the last backup. So, does that mean that if I were only doing the full backups like I'm thinking about doing, the most I'd lose without transaction logs is a day's worth of data?

Maybe I should run the sql bu nightly immediately followed by a transaction log backup, or is the transaction log actually included in a full backup? I guess what I'm getting at is that there is not so much data being entered that it needs to be backed up every couple of hours. I think if running a full daily backup insures that the most data they could lose is the data since the last full backup they would be allright.
LVL 10

Accepted Solution

Matt Bowler earned 2000 total points
ID: 39233601
Full recovery mode is used when you need to be able to recover to a point in time. When in this mode transactions are not cleared form the active log until they are backed up and for this reason it is recommended to take log backups in this mode. Otherwise your logs will grow unbounded.

No the two full backups will not negate each other :) - it's just a best practise around being able to find all backups for the database, in particular if you do a differential backup at any point.

My recommendation is:

If you only need to be able to recover to the last full backup - then you should switch to simple recovery model.

If you want to be able to recover to point in time then you should schedule and run transaction log backups regularly (timing depends on workload - sounds like every couple of hours will work for you).

As long as you don't use differential backups (and it doesn't sound like you are) then you should be okay with the backup exec running as well...


Author Closing Comment

ID: 39233613
Thanks for your help.

You are correct. There are no differential backups being ran.
I will leave BUEXEC running as it is.

I think I'll wait to switch to simple recovery mode. Other than log file size, is there any harm to leaving it as full recovery mode?
LVL 10

Expert Comment

by:Matt Bowler
ID: 39233616
No - :)

Featured Post

Free Tool: IP Lookup

Get more info about an IP address or domain name, such as organization, abuse contacts and geolocation.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Microsoft Access has a limit of 255 columns in a single table; SQL Server allows tables with over 255 columns, but reading that data is not necessarily simple.  The final solution for this task involved creating a custom text parser and then reading…
One of the most important things in an application is the query performance. This article intends to give you good tips to improve the performance of your queries.
Via a live example combined with referencing Books Online, show some of the information that can be extracted from the Catalog Views in SQL Server.
Viewers will learn how to use the SELECT statement in SQL and will be exposed to the many uses the SELECT statement has.

886 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question