Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-10-08 Thread Kern Sibbald
The idea of putting the PoolName and MediaType into the volume label at the time the code was written seemed reasonable, but it makes changing the volume rather inflexible.  As a consequence, though those fields are written, no one ever actually uses them.

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-09 Thread Dan Langille
> On Sep 8, 2017, at 10:39 AM, Dan Langille wrote: > >> On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Phil Stracchino > > wrote: >> >> On 09/07/17 22:04, Dan Langille wrote: >>> I have recently moved to one Storage device per pool. >>> >>> Why? >>> >>> So each pool is on a differen

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Dimitri Maziuk
On 09/08/2017 11:27 AM, Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 09/08/17 11:28, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: >> >> We do what we must because we can, >> for the good of all of us. ;) > > But there's no use crying over every mistake > You just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake I think the answer to your questi

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 09/08/17 11:28, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > > We do what we must because we can, > for the good of all of us. ;) But there's no use crying over every mistake You just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Dimitri Maziuk
On 2017-09-08 09:39, Dan Langille wrote: On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Phil Stracchino I'm curious.  What do you see as the advantage of this layout? - because I can (I was at vBSDCon and had the time to do this) ZFS pools can be made up of iscsi devices, you could potentially make one on

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 09/08/17 10:39, Dan Langille wrote: >> On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Phil Stracchino > >> I'm curious.  What do you see as the advantage of this layout? > ### > > If the Pool is no longer required, it is easy to delete. Dividing data > up this way > it's always a good idea, because of the flexi

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Dan Langille
> On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Phil Stracchino wrote: > > On 09/07/17 22:04, Dan Langille wrote: >> I have recently moved to one Storage device per pool. >> >> Why? >> >> So each pool is on a different ZFS dataset. > > > I'm curious. What do you see as the advantage of this layout? Backgro

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Dan Langille
> On Sep 8, 2017, at 6:47 AM, Martin Simmons wrote: > > That's a useful article. Thank you. > There is a minor caveat when copying volume files: the volume label contains > the PoolName and MediaType. This is minor because it only matters if you need > to bscan the volume before it is recycled

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-08 Thread Martin Simmons
That's a useful article. There is a minor caveat when copying volume files: the volume label contains the PoolName and MediaType. This is minor because it only matters if you need to bscan the volume before it is recycled. __Martin > On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 22:04:35 -0400, Dan Langille said: >

Re: [Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-07 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 09/07/17 22:04, Dan Langille wrote: > I have recently moved to one Storage device per pool. > > Why? > > So each pool is on a different ZFS dataset. I'm curious. What do you see as the advantage of this layout? -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@c

[Bacula-users] A device per pool

2017-09-07 Thread Dan Langille
I have recently moved to one Storage device per pool. Why? So each pool is on a different ZFS dataset. Once I figured out the process for the first one, the rest was mostly waiting for data to be copied. I documented it here: https://dan.langille.org/2017/09/06/bacula-ran-out-of-space-moved-s