Am 30.08.24 um 10:49 schrieb Marcin Haba:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 at 09:46, Stefan G. Weichinger <li...@xunil.at
<mailto:li...@xunil.at>> wrote:
Sounds great. May I ask why this isn't enabled by default?
Hello Stefan,
Yes, it is a good practice and a good idea. I think it isn't enabled by
default because not every Bacula user uses the Bvfs restore.
2nd: I add this to my JobDefs, OK? Did right now.
Great.
I tried to run ".bvfs_update jobid=5252" in bconsole and assumed this
would trigger a cache build for that job. No special activity to see
now
... no postgresql load ... Do I misunderstand here?
It can depend on couple of things, such as:
1) if the .bvfs_update was already called for the jobid (Bacularis
restore wizard calls the .bvfs_update too). If yes, it can mean that
this jobid is already in cache, so nothing to do for .bvfs_update.
2) if for this job with a given jobid there are many new paths to
process. (incremental/differential jobs in most cases are smaller than full)
I will run a job now with the enhanced JobDef, and check
Good luck!
great, thanks
running a test job now
I might do that cache-update manually for the last 10-20 jobs maybe ...
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
