Looking in the bacula logs to see why they are being marked as used ("Marking
Volume "..." as Used" messages) may give a clue.
__Martin
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:24:35 -0500, Brendan Martin said:
>
> Several months ago, I got copy jobs set up and working. Sizes, counts,
> and retention set
Several months ago, I got copy jobs set up and working. Sizes, counts,
and retention settings were all identical to the corresponding primary
pools when I started. After a while, I began seeing copy jobs waiting
for appendable volumes. I began manually marking the oldest volume per
pool for recy
Yes, using separate pools would prevent media sharing.
You could also try setting Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1 in the Device directive
in the Storage Daemon. See:
http://www.bacula.org/7.0.x-manuals/en/main/Storage_Daemon_Configuratio.html#SECTION00173
http://www.bacula.org/7.0.x-
Hi,
thanks for the reply. Yes I have set maximum Jobs to 3. I have two
drives in one Library witch can (must!) handle two jobs at a time so I
set the maximum Job for the Storage Daemon/Resource since I though
that’s the way to go - Actually I would love to spread one job over two
drives but I h
It looks like you have Maximum Concurrent Jobs set to > 1, so you have jobs
interleaving on the volumes because they specify the same pool.
I don't know how that is supposed to interact with Maximum Volume Jobs = 1,
but it looks like it doesn't work. Did you expect it to do something
specific?
_
Hi all,
we startet using Bacula with a Neo400 ( incl. 2 LTO6 Drives ) for
backup. Although we have quit big amounts of data to backup the job
should be pretty simple since mostly it just needs to copy the files to
tapes for an off-site backup. Since we are using a zfs as file system
bacula h
hello
i'm little beginner with bacula and i've got a comprehension problem. Here is
the configuration file for one client : http://pastebin.fr/10723.
For me and according to this configuration file (Maximum Volume Jobs = 1), each
incremental backup should be in one volume until 21 days of retentio
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Brian Debelius
wrote:
> I think I would like to change my disk pool to have a Maximum Volume
> Jobs = 1 so that there is only one job per file. My thought is that it
> would lead to more efficient recycling. I believe if I do this then
> this will not allow job
I think I would like to change my disk pool to have a Maximum Volume
Jobs = 1 so that there is only one job per file. My thought is that it
would lead to more efficient recycling. I believe if I do this then
this will not allow job concurrency. Is there a way to do have one job
per file, and
