Thanks For you Reply !
I believe that webmin is not perfectly for manage the bacula config files,
make changes with errors, as passwords without " "
etc. I make changes very very carefully and edit manually bacula.dir.conf
too.
Thanks for your help Wanderlei & Marcin .
Leonardo
Saludos cordiale
On 10/26/2016 05:14 PM, Marcin Haba wrote:
> Hello Dimitri,
>
> OK, I understood your need wrongly.
no worries
> On 26 October 2016 at 23:13, Marcin Haba wrote:
>> You have to be careful when you switch active/passive after failover
>> because there can be miliseconds when your cluster can be s
Hello Dimitri,
OK, I understood your need wrongly.
That's fine that you solved the FD naming issue.
On 26 October 2016 at 23:13, Marcin Haba wrote:
> You have to be careful when you switch active/passive after failover
> because there can be miliseconds when your cluster can be splitted (it
He
(Reposted with proper Subject)
Here's what I have working now:
corosync/pacemaker cluster with node A @ 1.2.3.4, node B @ 1.2.3.5, and
cluster ip @ 1.2.3.1, shared storage mounted a /raid on the active node.
Bacula-fd is started at boot on both nodes and is left pretty much a the
default config.
On 10/26/2016 04:13 PM, Marcin Haba wrote:
> Hello Dimitri,
> In your cluster in the same time the File Daemon will be running on
> the only one node (A or B), not on both.
Ah, but this is the point: I *want* it on both. There's "node-local"
data worth backing up on each node as well as "cluster"
Hello Leonardo,
It seems to me that the configuration is broken after these delete actions.
I have never used the webmin, but I think that if this state you have
without your manual changes in configs (only changes via web
interface) you can report a bug to webmin developers.
Anyway, it doesn't
Hello Dimitri,
In your case cluster active/passive with shared storage replicated by
DRBD I think you need to use only one Bacula FD config, the same on
both nodes.
In your cluster in the same time the File Daemon will be running on
the only one node (A or B), not on both. It is the cluster way t
On 10/24/2016 04:15 PM, Josh Fisher wrote:
... snipped ...
Yes, this is more or less what I've been doing up until now. The good
news is, it seems I don't have to anymore. Here's what I have working now:
corosync/pacemaker cluster with node A @ 1.2.3.4, node B @ 1.2.3.5, and
cluster ip @ 1.2.3.1
On Wednesday 26 October 2016 10:20:33 Simone Caronni wrote:
> Please try the repository contains a rebuild of the official packages for
> RHEL/CentOS and Fedora.
>
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/slaanesh/Bacula/
>
> Upgrade is straightforward from CentOS 6/7 packages and does not have
Please try the repository contains a rebuild of the official packages for
RHEL/CentOS and Fedora.
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/slaanesh/Bacula/
Upgrade is straightforward from CentOS 6/7 packages and does not have any
external dependencies.
Regards,
--Simone
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at
10 matches
Mail list logo