ason Martin
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 05:44:44PM -0600, Nick Jones wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was hoping someone could help me identify what is going wrong with
> > my backup job?
> >
> > I recently updated from 2.0.3 to 2.2.5 so that building
Hello,
I was hoping someone could help me identify what is going wrong with
my backup job?
I recently updated from 2.0.3 to 2.2.5 so that building of directory
trees for restores were faster (and I am quite pleased). After I
updated, everything seemed fine, I was able to run several incremental
Hi all.
Maybe this is normal bacula behavior but it is causing me problems.
Say I have a large job to run (~28 hrs). I schedule the job to be run
daily. Now, if there is not a suitable full backup already written
(ie. the full backup is the current running job), the scheduled job
happily checks
Hello everyone.
I am interested in creating a disk to disk daily backup (at least
daily) that will backup up all files that were modified after a
certain date.
I realize this is possible with a differential backup but what I DONT
want is a full backup. I just want the subset of files that have b
gt; Yes, I understand that flipping a bit does not allow data on tape to
> > magically reorganize itself on the tape. It must be rewritten of
> > course.
> >
> No sorry, I did not mean that. I meant that a tape can not be be
> partially uncompressed and partially compressed i
This is the whole story.
The first time I wrote to the tape after running btape (including the
autochanger test) was part of a full backup to 7 tapes. All the tapes
filled to 400 Gigs roughly except this one, which errored at 52 Gigs
at which point bacula moved to the next appendable volume.
Ne
s
DataDeCompEnabled: yes
CompType: 0x1
DeCompType: 0x1
Block Position: 22658
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]#
On 1/25/07, John Drescher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1/25/07, Nick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I had a bad tape recently
> >
> > I have tried to verify i
yone.
Nick
On 12/15/06, Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 15 December 2006 18:40, Nick Jones wrote:
> > Comments/questions inline.
> >
> > On 12/15/06, Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday 15 December 2006 17:
are there
other ways to improve performance with this? Also, is it possible
this is recursively following symbolic links and that's why it takes
so long? What does "building the directory tree" do exactly?
Thanks
Nick
--
Nick Jones
University of Iowa
Dept of Neurology
Sys
Comments/questions inline.
On 12/15/06, Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 15 December 2006 17:36, Nick Jones wrote:
> Your explanation is correct. Here is the log which I should have looked
at
> and included in the original.
>
> 12-Dec 23:19 lcn-dir: Start B
ant to
avoid recreating the whole backup which takes awhile (24hr) with our
fileset.
FD Files Written: 45,422,838
FD Bytes Written: 2,059,990,875,973 (2.059 TB)
Can someone let me know if this is possible?
Thanks
Nick
On 12/15/06, James Cort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nick Jones
1 | LTO | 2006-12-12 23:19:17 |
+-++---+-+--+--+-+--+---+---+-----+
Nick
--
Nick Jones
University of Iowa
Dept of Neurology
Systems Analyst
319-356-0451
--
12 matches
Mail list logo
