What happened to sql_handle in sysprocesses?
-
In SQL Server 2000 you can monitor active processes by looking at the sql_handle column in sysprocesses. In SQL Server 2005 BOL says sql_handle ...
Represents the currently executing batch or object.
In SQL 2000 a non-zero value in sql_handle indicated an active process. You could not simply rely on the status column to check for an actively running process. This is not the case in 2005. I ran a profiler trace to confirm that just because sql_handle reports a non-zero value does not mean the corresponding process is active. Does anyone know why this has changed and how we are now to interpret sql_handle in 2005?
Thanks, Dave
-
sysprocesses is supplied as a backward compatible view in terms of "columns" the behaviour of many of those "compatibility views" have changed and you are adviced in BOL to use :
sys.dm_exec_connections
sys.dm_exec_sessions
sys.dm_exec_requests
instead of sysprocesses. I know that the text is an exact copy of the 2000 version of BOL so I am guessing this is a Copy+Paste Bug in 2005 BOL
* Noel -
That makes sense. Time to update my code. Thanks
-
Believe me I have been bitten by these "compatibility views" already many times specially with sysindexes.
Have fun with the upgrade
* Noel
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply