> > Actually, this is closer to the "volume set" idea I alluded to -- > > being able to define a single volume name representing a "set" of > > volumes where any member of the set would be acceptable to > satisfy a > > mount request for backup or restore. It's only moderately > related to > > the migration issue in that migration makes the idea of multiple > > synchronized copies of the data much more useful (eg, be > able to send > > the 2nd and subsequent copies to different offsites, etc). > > I believe I understand your "volume set" idea, but how is > this really different from a pool? Couldn't a current Bacula > pool be roughly equivalent to a Volume Set under your definition?
Thinking a bit more (and after much more coffee), this is really a issue of individual file entities having multiple location attributes, eg a copy of this file exists on volume A at location X, and on volume B at location Y, etc. If a file could have a list of locations where it could be found, volume sets would be unnecessary. Files get associated with locations on more than one volume. If one of the file locations is unavailable (accidentally overwritten, operator dropped the tape and it broke, or just offsite), one of the other members can be transparently mounted in it's place (if possibly suboptimally in terms of effort and drive optimization). This also removes any synchronization problems with the volume set idea, and is much more flexible. Forget volume sets, then. So, if we introduce a management class that says "files written with this management class are automatically duplicated on N distinct volumes from pools A, B, and C" (allowing the N pools to be the same or different, eg A, A and A would be legal), then you would get the desired ability to have multiple copies of the data, be able to mark a specific volume as unavailable (ie, offsite or destroyed), and migration would still work properly as specified by the pool definitions. > Yes I would like to divorce a Job from a Storage device, which I have > partially done in 1.37 in that you can specify multiple > storage devices and > the SD selects which one to use. A management class might be able to > encapsulate this though. See above. That might be the way to go to do this. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
