On Sunday 27 November 2005 06:41, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 04:00:59PM -0500, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> > Ross Boylan wrote:
> > > Item x: Deletion of Disk-Based Volumes
> > > Date: Nov 25, 2005
> > > Original: Ross Boylan <RossBoylan at stanfordalumni dot org>
> > > Status: Proposal
> > >
> > > What: It would be useful to control how long the actual backups were
> > > kept for those backups that went to disk-based volumes. A range of
> > > options similar to those currently available for retaining catalog
> > > information would be useful. An additional option to permit deletion
> > > of the actual backup when the record of the associated job and/or
> > > files is purged from the catalog would also be useful. However, it
> > > should be possible for the actual backups to be retained for more or
> > > less time than the associated catalog records.
> >
> > I suggest this could be accomplished with the addition of a single
> > optional Pool directive valid only for disk volumes:
> >
> > Delete Volume When Pruned = Yes
>
> If I understand the manual correctly, when a volume is pruned the
> associated catalog entries for jobs and files are deleted. It seems
> to me there's some value in decoupling the lifetime of the volume and
> the lifetime of the catalog records. Perhaps not enough value to be
> worth the extra complication, but some value.
>
> Also, how would the proposed option and recycling interact? If Delete
> Volume When Pruned and Recycle are both yes, who wins?
Yes, this is a pertinent comment. I think it is time that Bacula has the
capability of "deleting" a Volume, but the point in time that should happen
is when the Volume is recycled, or at a time that is specified by a new
directive.
I put the word "delete" in quotes above because it is a word that in Bacula
speak is already reserved to me delete the volume from the catalog. As a
consequence, we either need to redefine the current "delete volume" command
(probably not a good idea) or come up with different terminology such as:
Volume Data Retention = <time period>
or
Remove Volume After = <time period>
The second is probably more precise than the first, since the desired action
is to completely delete the Volume or is there a need simply to truncate the
Volume and leave it in the catalog for later reuse? If we need the latter,
then probably both of the above are needed.
The other question is: if Bacula knows where a tape Volume is (i.e. it is in a
drive or it is in an Autochanger), why shouldn't it also truncate and/or
remove a tape volume.
Note to truncate a tape Volume:
rewind()
rewrite the label
To remove a tape Volume:
delete the volume from the catalog
rewind()
write end of file
Finally, if Bacula doesn't know where a tape Volume is and you ask to delete
the data (truncate the volume) or remove the volume, why shouldn't it ask the
operator to mount the volume?
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
