Proactive job scheduling in Professional Posted 15 hours ago · Report reply Nigel Smith, You're right on both counts; I didn't read Jan Löwe's second post in this thread anywhere nearly thoroughly enough 😢 , probably because he posted it while I was writing a post myself. Please accept my apologies. However it appears that the analysis in the second point of my most-recent post isn't a total waste; the paragraph below the quote pinpoints what the bug is. When the destination of a Proactive script is a Storage Group, the "backup server" should immediately generate all "child" Proactive scripts—placing them into the "Waiting" queue in defiance of the second quoted Note. That way each "child" script for which there is initially no available activity thread would start to execute as a preceding "child" script finished executing—making an activity thread available. Jan Löwe, Please ASAP do the test Nigel Smith suggests in his last paragraph of the post immediately above this one, and submit a Support Case. It's now clear that it's really for a bug in an existing feature, so here's how to do that. I'd submit it myself, except that my past experience has shown that Retrospect Tech Support will ask the person who submitted the Support Case to test at least possible bug fix—and I no longer have enough "client" machines in my installation to do that. All you need to do for the Problem Statement is to copy the longest paragraph in your second post in this thread, and then append the result of that further test as an Additional Note.