I looked at the view and it is only looking at my subscriptions table where
Enabled = 1. I will try to see if I can find what we did with prior beta's
to get it to work, or may just submit as a bug if warranted.
Thanks for the help Joe.
"Andy Wilbourn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Yes I am. I will test it one more time in our QA environment, but our DEV
> it is not working. We went through and did an update to the subscriber
> table to set all disabled, we also tried using the NS API to do the same,
> but our subscriptions were still coming back. I guess I can look at the
> view in our application DB to see what the code is for ACTIVE
> I am not sure if Shyam is monitoring this group anymore, he does not have
> a primary focus of NS. Hopefully that does not get me in trouble, since I
> don't know if that is common knowledge. We went to Redmond and fully
> stress tested our solution for the SQL 2005, but did not test this aspect.
> It came up when we were wanting to stress another part of our solution in
> house, but did not want to generate alerts to all our test subscribers. To
> our surprise we did generate millions of alerts.
> "Joe Webb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Hi Andy -
>> Your understanding of the Subscriber.Enabled property is correct. If
>> the property is set to true, the subscriber's subscriptions are
>> candidates for the matching rules and can generate notifications. If
>> the property is set to false, the subscriptions associated with the
>> disabled subscriber will not produce notifications.
>> You are seeing something contrary to this in RTM?
>> Joe Webb
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Get up to speed quickly with SQLNS
>> I support PASS, the Professional Association for SQL Server.
>> On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:04:54 -0500, "Andy Wilbourn"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>I thought I had tested and validated that if a Subscriber is disabled,
>>>none of their subscriptions would be matched without having to disable
>>>I am using SQL 2005 NS. I believe we tested this on June CTP and it was
>>>working, but now with RTM it is not.
>>>Can someone tell what is supposed to happen?