Bennett, Silas (GE Infrastructure) wrote:
> The Full backup it is referencing "_IS_" good, but it is old. As a result the
> differentials are much bigger than they need to be. My question is why is it
> referencing an old Good Full backup verses a new Good Full backup?
Well, basically, I can see one hypothetical situation in which this
could occur.
Suppose you perform a Full backup against a fileset version A. You then
change the Fileset to version B, and perform another Full backup. Then
you back out the Fileset change, producing a version C, and run a
differential. If version C is identical to version A and had the same
MD5 checksum, so far as Bacula knows, you have reverted to fileset
version A, and in this case, I believe there is a possibility that since
a valid Full backup against Fileset version A exists, Bacula will base
the differential using the identical Fileset version C on the older Full
backup instead of the newer.
I have not at this time performed any testing to validate this theory,
and don't have the resources to do so.
If the two Full backups were both made against the same version of the
same Fileset, that blows this speculation out of the water, and in that
case I don't have a theory to explain the behavior at this time.
--
Phil Stracchino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Renaissance Man, Unix generalist, Perl hacker
Mobile: 603-216-7037 Landline: 603-886-3518
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
