Schedule Task - Interactive and Specific Account

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NeoPa
    Recognized Expert Moderator MVP
    • Oct 2006
    • 32654

    Schedule Task - Interactive and Specific Account

    My server is running Windows 2000 (All latest SPs & updates) and I need to start a job in the early hours with a specific network account and in interactive mode.

    I have been using the AT command for many years now to schedule jobs when required. One of the restrictions of this interface is that there is no way to specify a user account for a particular job. I looked at the Job Scheduling command (Scheduled Tasks) and, while it has the ability to specify an account that the specific job uses, it doesn't seem able to specify that the job should be interactive.

    Can someone please either confirm this as the case or explain to me where I'm going wrong. Perhaps provide some instructions on how to accomplish both.
  • NeoPa
    Recognized Expert Moderator MVP
    • Oct 2006
    • 32654

    #2
    I dug further into the Help system and discovered a bullet point hidden away :
    Originally posted by Help
    If a user whose account a task is set to run in is not logged on at the time the task is scheduled to run, the task runs but is not visible.
    I assume this determines the interactive status on its own. Not a concept I'm familiar with.

    I can continue with this, but if anyone can confirm or deny my current understanding that would still be appreciated.

    Comment

    • NeoPa
      Recognized Expert Moderator MVP
      • Oct 2006
      • 32654

      #3
      I did some testing and found that even running as the same account as the job schedule, it ran silently and invisibly. Great for submarines, but not much help when trying to develop a process.

      Unless I hear anything to the contrary, I'll assume the only way to do this is with the /Interactive flag of the AT command and just set all scheduled jobs to start as that rather than as SYSTEM. Less safe conceptually, but I think I can get away with it in this case. The server is fairly dedicated to a single bit of software anyway.

      Comment

      Working...