Previously, Drew Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said... > So, heavily used server and if I read your email correctly, you're > saying each time this runs it's reported as a Full backup? Or is it > detected as an incremental? Do you get a status OK when these report > to be finished? Any other details? > > My assumption is, this is not a bug but how you have this setup, the > amount of files you are backing up, files being opened and used, added > while the backup is taking place, etc. Perhaps with this amount of > data to backup and the server being busy with many files changing or > being added, you might want to look into taking some type of snapshot > to grab the backups from instead of running or grabbing the backups > while the server and or files are in some type of use. > > -Drew >
Yes there probably are some files changing. I doubt that's giving bacula a problem. I also tried to use VSS but the backups still died. There has not been a successful backup of this filesystem, so it runs as a full whether I specified it as such or not. Thanks for trying to help, but the backup failed hence why I inquired about whether I've found a bug or not. The server is moderately loaded (5% to 15% cpu busy as measured by windows task manager). File changes are typically a file being overwritten with a newer version. Other than that, most of the server access is by IIS opening files for reading, so I don't think it's a locking problem. Either way it probably wouldn't fail on the same file twice an hour apart. I should note that the file it fails on is a web link or .url file which is under 1kb in length. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
