On 2015-10-31 08:23, Josh Fisher wrote:
> Volume selection is fairly complex. The order in which volumes are
> purged greatly affects the next available volume selection. With
> multiple pools, varied retention times, and occasional error jobs, there
> is no way to maintain a static order.
While
On 10/30/2015 2:16 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> I'm burning in a 7.0.5 (since I don't see 7.2 RPMs in Simone's repo)
> server with the latest vchanger and 8 disk "magazines", 3TB each. Here's
> what I get backing up a 5+TB filesystem -- note that this is just a
> burn-in, not production:
>
> - full
On 10/30/2015 01:16 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> This is commodity spinning run disks
"rust" -^^^
--
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-
I'm burning in a 7.0.5 (since I don't see 7.2 RPMs in Simone's repo)
server with the latest vchanger and 8 disk "magazines", 3TB each. Here's
what I get backing up a 5+TB filesystem -- note that this is just a
burn-in, not production:
- full backup runs from 22-Oct 21:05 to 29-Oct 02:36,
- it's d
> I configured bacula with multiple pools and I assigned some volumes to
> each pool before hand.
> In the past two differential backups, bacula did not use the volumes
> already assigned to the pool, but it took one from the scratch pool,
> assigned to the pool and used it.
>
> Could anyone clarif
Hi
I configured bacula with multiple pools and I assigned some volumes to
each pool before hand.
In the past two differential backups, bacula did not use the volumes
already assigned to the pool, but it took one from the scratch pool,
assigned to the pool and used it.
Could anyone clarify why
