Why are these T-SQL jobs from different SQL Server instances executed on the same instance (AlwaysOn Availability Groups)

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












4















Recently, our blocked processes dashboard has been reporting blocked processes around the time when we do our statistic update.



The reason was quickly found: an update statistics job step (T-SQL) that is starting on both the secondary and the primary SQL Server instance.
The job updates several statistics on the same database, that is part of an AlwaysOn Availability Group. I would expect this to fail on the secondary instance.



A quick rundown of the failover history:



Server A, which should stay active due to licensing (will be named Active Server), failed over unexpectedly to Server B (Passive Server) on 20/02 at 9PM.



After the unplanned failover, we did another (but this time planned) manual failover back to the Active Server on 21/02 at 12PM.



Job history



Before the first failover all was good, and the active server is the only one running the job.



enter image description hereOne job running.
We see the stat updates running on the active side. (which is primary replica at the time)



During the short time that the passive server was the primary replica, we don't have any monitoring and the job history was cleared.



After the failover, back to the 'normal' state, after being on primary on the passive node for less than 24 hours, the job step on the passive instance has also been starting and running on the active instance.



enter image description here(I killed the sessions).



Now the interesting part to me, is that both jobs are running on the active server, seeming like the job is using the listener to get to the database. But it could be an entirely different reason.



There is a copy job PowerShell task running nightly at 01 AM (dbatools):



powershell.exe Copy-DbaAgentJob -ExcludeJob "CopyJobs,CopyLogins" -Source INDCSPSQLA01 -Destination INDCSPSQLP01 -Force


My guess is now aimed at the one time, the job copy happened from the active, secondary node --> primary passive node with -Force. This happened at 21/02 01 AM.



The Question



Why is the job step on the passive instance executing on the active instance's database?



Checklist



On both instances, the job target is local:



enter image description here



EXEC @ReturnCode = msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobserver @job_id = @jobId, @server_name = N'(local)'


The servername is correct



select name from sys.servers 
select @@SERVERNAME


both return the passive server.



The job IDs of active and passive are different:



--08C63F07-0853-41DA-BC88-8FDF44AE491F -- passive
--E8C88965-C581-4E06-B651-CC10637FCEEF -- active


Both jobs use the database in question in their step:



@database_name=N'DB1', 


--> Should not be accessible on the passive instance, resulting in failure.
No readable secondaries



enter image description here



The database is not accessible on the passive instance:



enter image description here



Version of both servers: 14.0.3030.27



T-SQL Job step command example



 @subsystem=N'TSQL', 
@command=N'update statistics dbo.table with fullscan ...'


Nothing is running on the passive instance when the job starts.



EDIT:



Restarting the agent on the passive node 'fixes' this, resulting in a new error on executing:




Unable to connect to SQL Server 'INDCSPSQLP01'. The step failed.




As a result, it no longer updates statistics on the primary instance



Hostnames = Passive & Active server, jobs where visibly running.
enter image description here



Application info



SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x9D358B2EF6C53C4BAD6A61CA87D51BF5 : Step 1) 
SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x6589C8E881C5064EB651CC10637FCEEF : Step 1)









share|improve this question
























  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

    – Max Vernon
    Feb 28 at 13:29











  • Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

    – Randi Vertongen
    Feb 28 at 20:14















4















Recently, our blocked processes dashboard has been reporting blocked processes around the time when we do our statistic update.



The reason was quickly found: an update statistics job step (T-SQL) that is starting on both the secondary and the primary SQL Server instance.
The job updates several statistics on the same database, that is part of an AlwaysOn Availability Group. I would expect this to fail on the secondary instance.



A quick rundown of the failover history:



Server A, which should stay active due to licensing (will be named Active Server), failed over unexpectedly to Server B (Passive Server) on 20/02 at 9PM.



After the unplanned failover, we did another (but this time planned) manual failover back to the Active Server on 21/02 at 12PM.



Job history



Before the first failover all was good, and the active server is the only one running the job.



enter image description hereOne job running.
We see the stat updates running on the active side. (which is primary replica at the time)



During the short time that the passive server was the primary replica, we don't have any monitoring and the job history was cleared.



After the failover, back to the 'normal' state, after being on primary on the passive node for less than 24 hours, the job step on the passive instance has also been starting and running on the active instance.



enter image description here(I killed the sessions).



Now the interesting part to me, is that both jobs are running on the active server, seeming like the job is using the listener to get to the database. But it could be an entirely different reason.



There is a copy job PowerShell task running nightly at 01 AM (dbatools):



powershell.exe Copy-DbaAgentJob -ExcludeJob "CopyJobs,CopyLogins" -Source INDCSPSQLA01 -Destination INDCSPSQLP01 -Force


My guess is now aimed at the one time, the job copy happened from the active, secondary node --> primary passive node with -Force. This happened at 21/02 01 AM.



The Question



Why is the job step on the passive instance executing on the active instance's database?



Checklist



On both instances, the job target is local:



enter image description here



EXEC @ReturnCode = msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobserver @job_id = @jobId, @server_name = N'(local)'


The servername is correct



select name from sys.servers 
select @@SERVERNAME


both return the passive server.



The job IDs of active and passive are different:



--08C63F07-0853-41DA-BC88-8FDF44AE491F -- passive
--E8C88965-C581-4E06-B651-CC10637FCEEF -- active


Both jobs use the database in question in their step:



@database_name=N'DB1', 


--> Should not be accessible on the passive instance, resulting in failure.
No readable secondaries



enter image description here



The database is not accessible on the passive instance:



enter image description here



Version of both servers: 14.0.3030.27



T-SQL Job step command example



 @subsystem=N'TSQL', 
@command=N'update statistics dbo.table with fullscan ...'


Nothing is running on the passive instance when the job starts.



EDIT:



Restarting the agent on the passive node 'fixes' this, resulting in a new error on executing:




Unable to connect to SQL Server 'INDCSPSQLP01'. The step failed.




As a result, it no longer updates statistics on the primary instance



Hostnames = Passive & Active server, jobs where visibly running.
enter image description here



Application info



SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x9D358B2EF6C53C4BAD6A61CA87D51BF5 : Step 1) 
SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x6589C8E881C5064EB651CC10637FCEEF : Step 1)









share|improve this question
























  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

    – Max Vernon
    Feb 28 at 13:29











  • Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

    – Randi Vertongen
    Feb 28 at 20:14













4












4








4








Recently, our blocked processes dashboard has been reporting blocked processes around the time when we do our statistic update.



The reason was quickly found: an update statistics job step (T-SQL) that is starting on both the secondary and the primary SQL Server instance.
The job updates several statistics on the same database, that is part of an AlwaysOn Availability Group. I would expect this to fail on the secondary instance.



A quick rundown of the failover history:



Server A, which should stay active due to licensing (will be named Active Server), failed over unexpectedly to Server B (Passive Server) on 20/02 at 9PM.



After the unplanned failover, we did another (but this time planned) manual failover back to the Active Server on 21/02 at 12PM.



Job history



Before the first failover all was good, and the active server is the only one running the job.



enter image description hereOne job running.
We see the stat updates running on the active side. (which is primary replica at the time)



During the short time that the passive server was the primary replica, we don't have any monitoring and the job history was cleared.



After the failover, back to the 'normal' state, after being on primary on the passive node for less than 24 hours, the job step on the passive instance has also been starting and running on the active instance.



enter image description here(I killed the sessions).



Now the interesting part to me, is that both jobs are running on the active server, seeming like the job is using the listener to get to the database. But it could be an entirely different reason.



There is a copy job PowerShell task running nightly at 01 AM (dbatools):



powershell.exe Copy-DbaAgentJob -ExcludeJob "CopyJobs,CopyLogins" -Source INDCSPSQLA01 -Destination INDCSPSQLP01 -Force


My guess is now aimed at the one time, the job copy happened from the active, secondary node --> primary passive node with -Force. This happened at 21/02 01 AM.



The Question



Why is the job step on the passive instance executing on the active instance's database?



Checklist



On both instances, the job target is local:



enter image description here



EXEC @ReturnCode = msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobserver @job_id = @jobId, @server_name = N'(local)'


The servername is correct



select name from sys.servers 
select @@SERVERNAME


both return the passive server.



The job IDs of active and passive are different:



--08C63F07-0853-41DA-BC88-8FDF44AE491F -- passive
--E8C88965-C581-4E06-B651-CC10637FCEEF -- active


Both jobs use the database in question in their step:



@database_name=N'DB1', 


--> Should not be accessible on the passive instance, resulting in failure.
No readable secondaries



enter image description here



The database is not accessible on the passive instance:



enter image description here



Version of both servers: 14.0.3030.27



T-SQL Job step command example



 @subsystem=N'TSQL', 
@command=N'update statistics dbo.table with fullscan ...'


Nothing is running on the passive instance when the job starts.



EDIT:



Restarting the agent on the passive node 'fixes' this, resulting in a new error on executing:




Unable to connect to SQL Server 'INDCSPSQLP01'. The step failed.




As a result, it no longer updates statistics on the primary instance



Hostnames = Passive & Active server, jobs where visibly running.
enter image description here



Application info



SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x9D358B2EF6C53C4BAD6A61CA87D51BF5 : Step 1) 
SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x6589C8E881C5064EB651CC10637FCEEF : Step 1)









share|improve this question
















Recently, our blocked processes dashboard has been reporting blocked processes around the time when we do our statistic update.



The reason was quickly found: an update statistics job step (T-SQL) that is starting on both the secondary and the primary SQL Server instance.
The job updates several statistics on the same database, that is part of an AlwaysOn Availability Group. I would expect this to fail on the secondary instance.



A quick rundown of the failover history:



Server A, which should stay active due to licensing (will be named Active Server), failed over unexpectedly to Server B (Passive Server) on 20/02 at 9PM.



After the unplanned failover, we did another (but this time planned) manual failover back to the Active Server on 21/02 at 12PM.



Job history



Before the first failover all was good, and the active server is the only one running the job.



enter image description hereOne job running.
We see the stat updates running on the active side. (which is primary replica at the time)



During the short time that the passive server was the primary replica, we don't have any monitoring and the job history was cleared.



After the failover, back to the 'normal' state, after being on primary on the passive node for less than 24 hours, the job step on the passive instance has also been starting and running on the active instance.



enter image description here(I killed the sessions).



Now the interesting part to me, is that both jobs are running on the active server, seeming like the job is using the listener to get to the database. But it could be an entirely different reason.



There is a copy job PowerShell task running nightly at 01 AM (dbatools):



powershell.exe Copy-DbaAgentJob -ExcludeJob "CopyJobs,CopyLogins" -Source INDCSPSQLA01 -Destination INDCSPSQLP01 -Force


My guess is now aimed at the one time, the job copy happened from the active, secondary node --> primary passive node with -Force. This happened at 21/02 01 AM.



The Question



Why is the job step on the passive instance executing on the active instance's database?



Checklist



On both instances, the job target is local:



enter image description here



EXEC @ReturnCode = msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobserver @job_id = @jobId, @server_name = N'(local)'


The servername is correct



select name from sys.servers 
select @@SERVERNAME


both return the passive server.



The job IDs of active and passive are different:



--08C63F07-0853-41DA-BC88-8FDF44AE491F -- passive
--E8C88965-C581-4E06-B651-CC10637FCEEF -- active


Both jobs use the database in question in their step:



@database_name=N'DB1', 


--> Should not be accessible on the passive instance, resulting in failure.
No readable secondaries



enter image description here



The database is not accessible on the passive instance:



enter image description here



Version of both servers: 14.0.3030.27



T-SQL Job step command example



 @subsystem=N'TSQL', 
@command=N'update statistics dbo.table with fullscan ...'


Nothing is running on the passive instance when the job starts.



EDIT:



Restarting the agent on the passive node 'fixes' this, resulting in a new error on executing:




Unable to connect to SQL Server 'INDCSPSQLP01'. The step failed.




As a result, it no longer updates statistics on the primary instance



Hostnames = Passive & Active server, jobs where visibly running.
enter image description here



Application info



SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x9D358B2EF6C53C4BAD6A61CA87D51BF5 : Step 1) 
SQLAgent - TSQL JobStep (Job 0x6589C8E881C5064EB651CC10637FCEEF : Step 1)






sql-server availability-groups sql-server-2017 jobs






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Feb 28 at 14:48









Tony Hinkle

3,0001625




3,0001625










asked Feb 28 at 13:19









Randi VertongenRandi Vertongen

4,016924




4,016924












  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

    – Max Vernon
    Feb 28 at 13:29











  • Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

    – Randi Vertongen
    Feb 28 at 20:14

















  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

    – Max Vernon
    Feb 28 at 13:29











  • Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

    – Randi Vertongen
    Feb 28 at 20:14
















Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

– Max Vernon
Feb 28 at 13:29





Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the job that resides in the msdb database on the secondary is connecting to the availability group-enabled database on the primary?

– Max Vernon
Feb 28 at 13:29













Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

– Randi Vertongen
Feb 28 at 20:14





Yep,Reason why is probably just guessing. Restarting the agent 'fixed' the issue.

– Randi Vertongen
Feb 28 at 20:14










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















7














I don't have a diagnosis for why this problem occurred, but if you have jobs running on databases that are in availability groups, it's best to include a check in step 1 that uses the fn_hadr_is_primary_replica function to check whether it is running on the primary or secondary.



IF (sys.fn_hadr_is_primary_replica('DB1') <> 1)
BEGIN
RAISERROR('%s is secondary', 11, 1, @@servername );
END


Configure this step to quit the job on failure. This is better than trying to run something that fails because it's hitting a secondary.






share|improve this answer






















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "182"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230953%2fwhy-are-these-t-sql-jobs-from-different-sql-server-instances-executed-on-the-sam%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    7














    I don't have a diagnosis for why this problem occurred, but if you have jobs running on databases that are in availability groups, it's best to include a check in step 1 that uses the fn_hadr_is_primary_replica function to check whether it is running on the primary or secondary.



    IF (sys.fn_hadr_is_primary_replica('DB1') <> 1)
    BEGIN
    RAISERROR('%s is secondary', 11, 1, @@servername );
    END


    Configure this step to quit the job on failure. This is better than trying to run something that fails because it's hitting a secondary.






    share|improve this answer



























      7














      I don't have a diagnosis for why this problem occurred, but if you have jobs running on databases that are in availability groups, it's best to include a check in step 1 that uses the fn_hadr_is_primary_replica function to check whether it is running on the primary or secondary.



      IF (sys.fn_hadr_is_primary_replica('DB1') <> 1)
      BEGIN
      RAISERROR('%s is secondary', 11, 1, @@servername );
      END


      Configure this step to quit the job on failure. This is better than trying to run something that fails because it's hitting a secondary.






      share|improve this answer

























        7












        7








        7







        I don't have a diagnosis for why this problem occurred, but if you have jobs running on databases that are in availability groups, it's best to include a check in step 1 that uses the fn_hadr_is_primary_replica function to check whether it is running on the primary or secondary.



        IF (sys.fn_hadr_is_primary_replica('DB1') <> 1)
        BEGIN
        RAISERROR('%s is secondary', 11, 1, @@servername );
        END


        Configure this step to quit the job on failure. This is better than trying to run something that fails because it's hitting a secondary.






        share|improve this answer













        I don't have a diagnosis for why this problem occurred, but if you have jobs running on databases that are in availability groups, it's best to include a check in step 1 that uses the fn_hadr_is_primary_replica function to check whether it is running on the primary or secondary.



        IF (sys.fn_hadr_is_primary_replica('DB1') <> 1)
        BEGIN
        RAISERROR('%s is secondary', 11, 1, @@servername );
        END


        Configure this step to quit the job on failure. This is better than trying to run something that fails because it's hitting a secondary.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Feb 28 at 14:06









        Tony HinkleTony Hinkle

        3,0001625




        3,0001625



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230953%2fwhy-are-these-t-sql-jobs-from-different-sql-server-instances-executed-on-the-sam%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown






            Popular posts from this blog

            Peggy Mitchell

            Palaiologos

            The Forum (Inglewood, California)