Are the failing block numbers always a little below 2^32 (like 4294944994 and 4294941825 in your messages)? If so, that maybe suggests a compiler bug if the same source code works when compiled on the older machine (or is it the same binary too?).
__Martin >>>>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 16:30:59 +0000, Roberts, Ben said: > > Hi Josh, > > > Could you downgrade the client to 5.0.2? I know SD and DIR are backward > > compatible with older clients, but I'm not so sure what happens when the > > client is a newer version. > > Since this exact topic came up in IRC last night, I tried a restore of a > backup made by a 5.0 client (RHEL 5.0.0-12.el6), and saw the same failure > 74GB in). > > > 15-Jan 23:51 backup3-sd JobId 263: Error: block.c:275 Volume data error at > 24:4294941825! Wanted ID: "BB02", got "". Buffer discarded. > > 15-Jan 23:51 backup3-sd JobId 263: Fatal error: fd_cmds.c:169 Command error > with FD, hanging up. > > I've also been doing some test restores from our older bacula infra (running > exactly the same DIR/SD versions) and have successfully restored >10TB so > it's looking like the issue is limited to the newer machine only. > > Regards, > > Ben Roberts > > IT Infrastructure ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
