On Wednesday 13 September 2006 17:44, Alan Brown wrote: > On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > So, getting back to my original question: > > > > Is there a definitive solution (and "upgrade to version X.Y.Z" is a > > fine answer) > > to the problem where backups fail because Bacula wants to use a volume > > in on tape drive when the volume is already loaded in another drive? > > Yes. > > Ensure that update slots is run against the autochanger, NOT against a > specific tape drive in the changer. > > If you need to run update slots against a specific drive (eg: in order to > unload tapes from anything except drive 0) then all the tapes in the > changer are linked to that drive and are unavailable for the other one. > > To verify this, use "query", option 15 (list tapes bacula thinks are in > the changer) > > > Right. There's no way (that I've found, with 1.38.9) to run "update slots" > > without it explicitely referencing tape drive 0. > > > > I'm a bit confused here... If volumes become associated with a particular drive > > as the result of running "update slots", then it sounds like there's no way > > around the fundamental problem, regardless of whether I upgrade to 1.38.11. > > The trick is to run update slots again, against the changer device. If > drive 0 is in use, Bacula should skip unloading it and move immediately to > cataloging the changer. > > > I'll take a closer look at the output from "update slots" in whatever version > > I'm running, and report the results. > > The output of the query command will also be of use. > > > => whether or not this problem exists in 1.39.22 or not, because it is unlikely > > => that I will be making any further patches for 1.38.11. > > > > For my clarification...do you consider the 1.39.x series to be production > > quality? > > As soon as Kern says "yes" I plan to update...
Thanks for the confidence :-), but as you will see in an email to come just a bit later, when 1.39.x goes production is a dilemma for me at the moment. > > > I do want to restate that I do appreciate the quality, features, and > > depth of Bacula, and I'm particularly grateful for your timely > > responses. Perhaps it's the fact that the package is so important, or > > that it's so close to "commercial quality" (whatever that is!) that > > causes people to have such high expectations. > > I suspect that's so. Bacula is very close to being perfect in many ways > and the final rough bits can be difficult to cope with at times, > especially when it results in backups not happening or taking several > times longer than was anticipated. > > AB > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
