On 2022-05-08 18:29, Marcin Haba wrote:
Hello Josip,
On Sun, 8 May 2022 at 15:27, Josip Deanovic
<djosip+n...@linuxpages.net>
wrote:
Hello!
I have compared Baculum and Bacularis web interfaces using their demo
sites.
Many thanks for your response and feedback. As always any fresh look at
the
project is precious and it helps to see it using other pair of eyes.
Glad to be of help.
I am not sure if Baculum improved its look since the last time I looked
into it within a year or is it just me.
It is hard to spot the differences and from what I have seen on the
demo
site, they poses the same features. Bacularis just moved few buttons
under existing menus and that's pretty much all.
I am curious, what is the actual functional difference and benefit of
using one
over another?
Comparing visually two demos it can look as you described. Bacularis is
a
fork of Baculum so it contains Baculum functions. To better know the
differences, if I could advise something, I would propose to read the
Bacularis website. The news section is a good place for start the same
as
the documentation. I also encourage to visit the GitHub project.
Thank you, I will follow your advice if I get more time.
Unfortunately I am short with time, that's the reason why I compared
project's demo sites instead of performing real life tests.
While comparing Baculum and Bacularis demo sites I noticed few strange
behaviors
which could be caused by a bug.
For example, with Baculum, when using restore and selecting either the
exact job
or chose the latest backup, in both cases at the end one would be
presented with
multiple files with the same name and location but from different
backup
job.
One could then select multiple of those files with the same name for
restoration
using "Add" link or using drag-and-drop feature.
It is versions box where you can choose version of selected file. It
lists
all versions of file for selected client, path and file.
That doesn't seem intuitive. Why would one expect to see all the files
for the client right after the step where one get to chose the exact
backup job and on the page it says that it is about:
- Backup client: server.baculus.pl-fd
- Job type: Backup
- Job name: BackupClient1
- Status: Ok
- Restore time point: 2022-05-08 20:00:18
When I test the restore procedure, the first step asks me to chose the
backup client. On the second step there is a list of available jobs to
chose from and only a single job can be selected (selection by radio
buttons).
There is also a note written in bold which says:
"Note: if you select incremental or differential backup, on the next
step
will be also loaded all directories and files from older backups
required
to do the job restore. In other words, the selected backup determines
time
point from which will be loaded the selected backup and other older
backups
(incremental, differential) backups up till closest full backup."
And that note is perfectly fine as one cannot restore files using just
incremental or differential backup job. A full backup job is required.
I interpret that note as an implicit statement that no files unrelated
to the selected job will be shown. This is also the most logical
decision
(at least to me).
Also, if full backup is selected, only the files related to that
specific
backup job should be displayed.
That makes no sense.
When you select from file versions box files to restore, you can see
yellow
tooltips for each file. In this tooltip is information about jobid for
file
together with few other file version properties.
Yes, I noticed that. That's how I confirmed that these are files
belonging to
multiple unrelated jobs. In fact, on the test server there are only full
backup jobs available and since I selected a single full backup jobs I
didn't
expect to see multiple versions of a file existing in other backup jobs
performed for the same backup client.
Which job would be used to restore the files added for the
restoration?
There will be restored file version from the latest job.
Ok, that's good but a warning message about two files of a different
version
selected for the restore might be even better. Maybe a user could be
prevented to add another file with the same location/filename to the
list
until the file already in the list is removed.
Also, if I may suggest a feature request, it would be nice to have
tooltip
similar to the one you have described, implemented for the files already
in the list of files selected for the restoration.
That would help observing and checking the version of the file
previously
added to the list.
With Bacularis the case is almost identical with the difference that
at
the last
step one cannot add multiple files but can still use drag-and-drop to
add them
to the list for restoration.
It is something to fix. Thanks for catching it.
You are welcome.
Apart from that, both tools have issues showing schedule configuration
for
a job.
This has been fixed already in 1.0.9. The version used in the online
demo
does not contain this fix yet.
I thought it might be the case.
Regards!
--
Josip Deanovic
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
