On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 2012-07-15 13:48, Steve Thompson wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Thomas Lohman wrote:
>>
>>> This actually is a hardcoded "sanity" check in the code itself. Search
>>> the mailing lists from the past year. I'm pretty sure I posted where in
>>> the co
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 2012-07-15 13:48, Steve Thompson wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Thomas Lohman wrote:
>>
>>> This actually is a hardcoded "sanity" check in the code itself. Search
>>> the mailing lists from the past year. I'm pretty sure I posted where in
>>> the co
On 2012-07-15 13:48, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Thomas Lohman wrote:
>
>> This actually is a hardcoded "sanity" check in the code itself.
>> Search
>> the mailing lists from the past year. I'm pretty sure I posted
>> where in
>> the code this was and what needed to be changed.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Thomas Lohman wrote:
> This actually is a hardcoded "sanity" check in the code itself. Search
> the mailing lists from the past year. I'm pretty sure I posted where in
> the code this was and what needed to be changed.
Excellent; thank you! I have found your post and the re
This actually is a hardcoded "sanity" check in the code itself. Search
the mailing lists from the past year. I'm pretty sure I posted where in
the code this was and what needed to be changed. We have no jobs that
run more than a few days so have not made such changes ourselves so I
can't gua
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012, Boutin, Stephen wrote:
> Try changing (or adding if you don't have it already) the heartbeat
> interval variable. I have about 160TB I'm currently backing up total &
> some of the boxes are 8-29TB jobs. Heartbeat is must, for large jobs, as
> far as I'm concerned.
Good ide
Try changing (or adding if you don't have it already) the heartbeat interval
variable. I have about 160TB I'm currently backing up total & some of the boxes
are 8-29TB jobs. Heartbeat is must, for large jobs, as far as I'm concerned.
- Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 14, 2012, at 8:19 PM, "St
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> That's insane! :)
Heh :)
> Ok, can you maybe carve it up a little? How big is the backup?
I have already carved it up just about as much as I can. I have to back up
about 6 TB in 28 million files (that change very slowly) to a remote
offsite SD.
On Jul 14, 2012, at 5:38 PM, Steve Thompson wrote:
> Bacula 5.0.2, CentOS 5.8.
>
> I have this in my job definitions:
>
>Full Max Run Time = 29d
>
> but still they are terminated after 6 days:
>
> 14-Jul 20:27 cbe-dir JobId 39969: Fatal error: Network error with FD
>during Backup: ER
Bacula 5.0.2, CentOS 5.8.
I have this in my job definitions:
Full Max Run Time = 29d
but still they are terminated after 6 days:
14-Jul 20:27 cbe-dir JobId 39969: Fatal error: Network error with FD
during Backup: ERR=Interrupted system call
14-Jul 20:27 cbe-dir JobId 39969: Fata
Op 8/05/2012 11:06, Silver Salonen schreef:
> Hi.
>
> Does anyone know how to interpret Max Time directives from
> http://www.bacula.org/en/dev-manual/main/main/New_Features_in_3_0_0.html#SECTION00132417000
> ?
>
> Should the "Max Run Time" indicate "Run Time" + "Blocked" (Max Wait Ti
Hi.
Does anyone know how to interpret Max Time directives from
http://www.bacula.org/en/dev-manual/main/main/New_Features_in_3_0_0.html#SECTION00132417000
?
Should the "Max Run Time" indicate "Run Time" + "Blocked" (Max Wait Time) +
"Run Time"?
Also, "Max Run Sched Time" is said to
Hey
Either I am misinterpreting something concerning the Max Run Time
directive, or there's a bug in checking it.
Manual says:
Max Run Time = The time specifies the maximum allowed time that
a job may run, counted
from when the job starts, (not necessarily the same as when the job
was sched
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:52:21AM +0200, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Why do job 3-5 get cancelled with 0s runtime?
> How can I file a bug report?
Create an account at http://bugs.bacula.org/ and 'Report issue'.
--
Down
Harald Schmalzbauer schrieb am 08.04.2010 20:18 (localtime):
Am 08.04.2010 14:20, schrieb Matija Nalis:
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 12:46:25PM +0200, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
Absurdly canceled job 47:
Fatal error: Max run time exceeded. Job canceled.
Scheduled time: 04-Apr-2010 21:01:03
Am 08.04.2010 14:20, schrieb Matija Nalis:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 12:46:25PM +0200, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
>
>> Absurdly canceled job 47:
>> Fatal error: Max run time exceeded. Job canceled.
>> Scheduled time: 04-Apr-2010 21:01:03
>> Start time: 04-Apr-2010 21:39:41
>>
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 12:46:25PM +0200, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Absurdly canceled job 47:
> Fatal error: Max run time exceeded. Job canceled.
> Scheduled time: 04-Apr-2010 21:01:03
> Start time: 04-Apr-2010 21:39:41
> End time: 04-Apr-2010 21:39:41
> Ela
Dear all,
one of my job ran into max run time limitation and was canceled (after
30 mins)
Then next job was started and finisehd correclty (another 8 mins) but
all subsequent jobs where cancelled due to "Max run time exceeded".
Here's the journal:
Timed out job 45:
banana-dir Fatal error: Max
Hi list,
today one job failed with "max run time exceeded",
this job is configured with "max run time = 20mins" and
was scheduled for 12:05.
due to some small problems it took some time to get the tapedrive ready.
the job was cancelled at 12:25 after 2 minutes of run time:
2009-01-14 12:21:40
19 matches
Mail list logo
