Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Hemant Shah
--- On Thu, 1/8/09, Michael Galloway wrote: > From: Michael Galloway > Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL > after FULL backup > To: "bacula" > Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, 5:55 AM > On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 06:

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Michael Galloway
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 06:21:50AM -0500, John Drescher wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Frank Altpeter > wrote: > > My bad, just detected it by myself... the FileSet has been modified > > and so I assume the Incremental backup has been upgraded to Full > > because the FileSet has been ch

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread John Drescher
> ACK :-) > Since I know that the changed FileSet content was the cause for > upgrading to FULL, I think this is (at least for myself) a wanted > feature, to ensure that my backups are covering all the content to be > saved. I would only wish that the notification output would mention > that instea

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread John Drescher
> To my mind that wasn't a question at all - he just notices that it was because > of that (and there was nothing wrong with it), and made a suggestion for > improving notice. > You are correct. I was just trying to point out their is a way to avoid the unnecessary full. > > The suggestion is quite

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Frank Altpeter
Hi 2009/1/8, Silver Salonen : > To my mind that wasn't a question at all - he just notices that it was because > of that (and there was nothing wrong with it), and made a suggestion for > improving notice. > > The suggestion is quite useful to my mind and it should be made into a > correct >

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Silver Salonen
On Thursday 08 January 2009 13:21:50 John Drescher wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Frank Altpeter wrote: > > My bad, just detected it by myself... the FileSet has been modified > > and so I assume the Incremental backup has been upgraded to Full > > because the FileSet has been changed.

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread John Drescher
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Frank Altpeter wrote: > My bad, just detected it by myself... the FileSet has been modified > and so I assume the Incremental backup has been upgraded to Full > because the FileSet has been changed. > > But IMHO there should be a better notification for that, someth

Re: [Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Frank Altpeter
My bad, just detected it by myself... the FileSet has been modified and so I assume the Incremental backup has been upgraded to Full because the FileSet has been changed. But IMHO there should be a better notification for that, something like "FileSet has been modified, upgrading to FULL backup".

[Bacula-users] Another strangeness on 2.4.4 - upgrading to FULL after FULL backup

2009-01-08 Thread Frank Altpeter
Hi again, I've just hit another strange behaviour with my bacula system. A job which has been doing a FULL backup by normal schedule two days ago, did just advance to FULL on the incremental schedule today: 08-Jan 00:30 backup-dir JobId 74: No prior Full backup Job record found. 08-Jan 00:30 bac