John Kodis wrote:
I've been using the standard monthly-full, weekly-differential, and
daily-incremental backup scheme that's provided by the bacula-supplied
configuration files. This is all working fine, but I've now added
enough clients that a full backup takes just over two days.
After the full backup completes, it is immediately followed by the two
daily incremental backups and the three catalog backups that have
queued up while the full backup was in progress. While it's only a
minor waste of tape, it's still something that I'd like to avoid if I
can do so easily.
Is there a job directive or some other way to say "Don't schedule
another instance of a job if the same job is already waiting to run?"
-- John Kodis.
I'm not so sure this is a waste of resources. Only the files that were
changed will be in those incrementals. The first one will catch all the
files that changed while the full was running. The second one will be
virtually empty. If you skip these backups and then a problem occurs the
following day, you won't be able to restore to the most current
situation, but only to the situation at the moment of the full backup.
Jo
-------------------------------------------------------
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
