Hello, wt., 10 gru 2019 o 20:46 John H Nyhuis <jnyh...@uw.edu> napisał(a):
> I have noticed that my config of bacula only seems to ever use one > drive. For example, when labeling a large pool of volumes, it mounts > and labels each volume sequentially using only a single drive. Yes, you asked Bacula to do that with a single label command. (...) Enter autochanger drive[0]: (...) > As each > volume label is independent of the other volumes, it seems like this > would be much faster if the volumes were split between the drives. (Or > at least wear would be evened out between the drives). > Yes, if you want then you can execute a multiple label commands, a single for every single drive you have in your lib. > > Is this the typical behavior, or can my config be improved in some way > to better use multiple drives? The label operation is a single drive only as it could be executed when other jobs are running or suppose to run in the near future. In most cases you can accept to capture a single drive for labeling, leaving other drives free for backup/restore jobs. Capturing all available drives at once without notice would be unacceptable. > > Does anyone have ideas for how I could use this hardware more efficiently? > > For labeling? Execute multiple label command, a single for every drive available in your lib. Simple and efficient. best regards -- Radosław Korzeniewski rados...@korzeniewski.net
_______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
