On 07/26/14 14:11, Kern Sibbald wrote: > Hello, > > Once a volume is marked disabled, Bacula should do *nothing* with it.
Right, I guess I kind of agree with this sentiment. My problem was that since Bacula was abiding by and acting on retention periods, I came to the conclusion that their scratch pool assignments should also be heeded. I am OK with the idea of Bacula doing nothing with disabled volumes, but that leads us to the next dilemma which you pointed out: > We > might even consider if we want to turn off pruning of disabled volumes, > but I am not sure that would be a good idea as it could lead to a > catalog that grows. Which ever decision is made, I'll be OK with it now that I completely understand what was/is going on with my purged volumes. Thanks for the quick response Kern. P.S. Any chance that either, or both of those actions could be options? Prune Disabled Volumes = y/n Recycle Disabled Volumes = y/n Just askin' :) Bill -- Bill Arlofski Reverse Polarity, LLC http://www.revpol.com/ -- Not responsible for anything below this line -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
