> Thanks for the responses.
> I successfully set the volume status to "Used" and then tried to prune the
> offending volume. Bacula asked if I wanted to modify the retention period,
> which is currently set to be 1 year. I chose yes and tried setting it to 1
> day. Then I "list volumes" and the vol
Thanks for the responses.
I successfully set the volume status to "Used" and then tried to prune the
offending volume. Bacula asked if I wanted to modify the retention period,
which is currently set to be 1 year. I chose yes and tried setting it to 1
day. Then I "list volumes" and the volume still
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Andreas Thienemann wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Apr 2009, John Drescher wrote:
>
>> > But seriously, you're not going to tell me that the bacula-dir process is
>> > going to need 2.6 GB of memory because of a few messages?
>> >
>> When I replied I did think of that. That is
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009, John Drescher wrote:
> > But seriously, you're not going to tell me that the bacula-dir process is
> > going to need 2.6 GB of memory because of a few messages?
> >
> When I replied I did think of that. That is quite excessive, I was
> thinking thousands of messages but enough
>> Well 2 drives are blocked because you have no appendable or usable
>> media. Any idea on how long it has been waiting for you to add tapes?
>> Perhaps the memory problem is that the messages are growing. Have you
>> typed messages in bconsole recently?
>
> Just to clarify. Yes, I know it's block
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009, John Drescher wrote:
> Well 2 drives are blocked because you have no appendable or usable
> media. Any idea on how long it has been waiting for you to add tapes?
> Perhaps the memory problem is that the messages are growing. Have you
> typed messages in bconsole recently?
Jus
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Andreas Thienemann wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Dan Langille wrote:
>
>> I no longer see the original detail, but I suspect there is one job
>> running, and it has spooled attributes waiting to be written. That is y
>> theory.
>
> Running Jobs:
> Writing: Increme
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Dan Langille wrote:
> I no longer see the original detail, but I suspect there is one job
> running, and it has spooled attributes waiting to be written. That is y
> theory.
Running Jobs:
Writing: Incremental Backup job analytics.2009-04-11_23 JobId=1229
Volume=""
pool=
I noticed while doing some test restores to a winbacula client that
some of the Windows attributes (read, system) were set in restored
directories even though they weren't set up on the source directories.
The modification time, ACLs, and other attributes looked OK. A diff
of the contents turned u
Hi Kjetil
Looking for between emails old of the list, I found this answer that I
had not read:
On Thursday, 02 October 2008 02:50:47 +0200,
Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> > C M Reinehr wrote:
> >> This question was answered just a couple of weeks ago by Kjetil T.
> >> Homme. I quote:
> >
> >> to
Hi,
19.04.2009 03:09, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>> "0 Files on Volume "June08-02" purged from catalog." And
>> then when I list volumes the offending volume is still
>> marked "error". Is there way to recycle a volume that has
>> been marked "error"?
>>
>
> update volume->Volume status
>
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
