SharePoint 2010 Dead sites


  • We are considering using the dead site timer job. I can't seem to find any information on when SharePoint considers a site dead. explains about configuring the emails that are sent out before deletion, but there is nothing that gives the option on how much non-usage is needed before the site dies. So my question is this; How much non-usage is required before SharePoint declares a site dead?

    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:35 PM


All replies

  • I thought it was based at replying to that e-mail that is send out. Let's say someones does not answer to the e-mail the site is deleted. Not sure though.

    Blog: Twitter: @SharePTJasper

    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:53 PM
  • Are you asking what is considered an activity as compared to the length of inactivity?

    Although I can't find anything on this either, I'd take a stab on it being any of the activities that can be logged in the site collection analytics.  If the site is never accessed, content edited and so on, I'd believe the site would generally be considered dead.  The period of inactivity is what you're able to configure though, so it may be worth checking if your firm has any archiving policies before making any alterations to this setting.

    Steven Andrews | SharePoint Professional | |

    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:02 PM
  • Hi,

    Everything in the article:

    default settings: after 90 days of inactivity it sends 28 daily emails. If no response the site declared dead

    Farm admin can change values though.

    Hope it helps.


    MCP, MCTS, SharePoint tips blog:

    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:05 PM
  • Where do you configure inactivity? You can configure when the emails start going out, but I didn't see anything for inactivity.
    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:09 PM
  • Inactivity is assumed. Key point is actual activity on the site. If there was any hit of the site (click link provided in email is enough) during that 90+28 days  period it starts count again.



    MCP, MCTS, SharePoint tips blog:

    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:19 PM
  • Thanks for clearing that up. It is not what I'd hoped, but at least I understand it.
    Tuesday, April 10, 2012 5:02 PM