On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:27:17PM +0100, stefano scotti wrote: > > Thanks Uwe, > > I think i will use one of your workarounds, because they are workarounds. > > The best solution was to allow mixing lower priorities even though an > higher job is running. > Something like Allow Lower Mixed Priority directive. > But if bacula's devolopers didn't think about that, i have to sadly conform. > > Thank you again. >
You're welcome ;-) I think the "bacula enterprise" edition allows for allotment of bandwitdth on a job / client level, maybe you'd want to look into that, too. In the years we've been running bacula I've usually found that a backup job hardly has any impact on the client being backed up unless it's a very old system and you're using some crazy compression level, so I wouldn't worry to much about systems being backed up while they're in active use. You can always require "accurate" backups followed by a verify job if you want to play it really safe. All the best, Uwe -- NIONEX --- Ein Unternehmen der Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
