Hi, 23.07.2007 23:36,, George R.Kasica wrote:: >> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:08:36 +0200, you wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 23.07.2007 20:33,, George R.Kasica wrote:: >>> Hello: >>> >>> I'm sure this is a simple fix, but I'm missing something in the >>> details... >>> >>> I have a working configuration here with the latest stable release of >>> bacula here using 3 tape drives to backup 4 systems. What I need some >>> help with is making it a bit more efficient. >>> >>> Currently it works as follows all 4 jobs have a start time of 01:00: >>> >>> Drive 1 backs up Server 1. Job is Priority 12 and max jobs equals 4 >>> >>> Drive 2 backs up Server 2. Job is Priority 12 and max jobs equals 4 >>> >>> Drive 3 backs up Server 3. Job is Priority 12 and max jobs equals 4 >>> Drive 3 backs up Server 4. Job is Priority 13 and max jobs equals 4 >>> >>> This works well and gets the job done with one small hitch. The last >>> job for server 4 waits to start until all other jobs complete and the >>> one for Server 2 takes FAR longer to run than Server 1 or 3 does. >>> >>> What I want to have happen is for the 2nd job on Drive 3 to start as >>> soon as the first one is finished but not to have it run at the same >>> time which is what seems to happen if I set it as Priority 12. >>> >>> What am I missing here? and what do I need to adjust and where to get >>> this to happen? I'm sure its a simple fix I just can't see it. >> Sounds like you need to set "Maximum Concurrent Jobs=2" for the >> director. Of course, you can use more than two concurrent jobs if your >> backup server can handle that... in this case, you'd have to set the >> "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" to something more than 1 for the storage >> devices, though. > Arno: > > I've already got the following in the director conf: > > Under Director Setting: > > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 4 > > And under each job def: > > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 4 > > And each Client def: > > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 4 > > And each Storage Device def: > > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 4 > > Would I be correct in changing the Priority of the second job for > Drive #3 to also be 12 from the 13 its at now and then dropping the > maximum concurrent jobs to 1 but would I do that in the Job Def or the > Storage Def?
Sorry for the confusion I probably created - the different priority is definitely quite important here :-) "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" in the jobs is probably not what matters here, as you run four distinct jobs, not the same job multiple times. > I'm thinking since I want the tape unit to only run one > job at a time and queue up the second until the first completes I want > to make the max concurrent =1 in the Storage def for that one drive > no?? > > Or would it be easier to keep it all as is, put the Priority at 12 and > start the job at say 1:01 and would that queue it up until the first > finished?? > > What I don't want to happen is to have two jobs running to the same > storage device at the same time...I'm not sure what that would do in > terms of a backup or the performance.....if it would work physically I > have no problem with it, but what would it do to the performance? I'm > thinking that it would still be faster to run one after the other. I've got to get this sorted in my head again... you have three tape drives and four jobs. Running jobs to different tape drives concurrently is ok. Job 2 takes longer than the others. Job concurrency is already enabled. Is this, so far, correct? Then you'd have to make sure only one job uses a tape drive at any given time and that jobs run concurrently otherwise. I'd recommend using the same priorities for all jobs. Set "Maximum Con..." for all the drives to 1. Set it to one in your job definitions. Set it to a reasonably high number for the DIR. Run all your jobs at the same time. Assuming that volumes for the pools used are available, things should work correctly - basically, three jobs start, the fourth one is held. Once the first job finishes, the held jobs starts. You probably want to make sure the longest job is started a moment before the others, once everything works up to this point. Ok, to answer your question now: > Would I be correct in changing the Priority of the second job for > Drive #3 to also be 12 from the 13 its at now and then dropping the > maximum concurrent jobs to 1 but would I do that in the Job Def or the > Storage Def? Yes, and in the Storage definition. And now I hope I didn't overlook something again :-) Arno -- Arno Lehmann IT-Service Lehmann www.its-lehmann.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
