Re: [Bacula-users] storage daemon "sub-optimal" behaviour using 2 tape drives

2006-05-09 Thread Alan Brown
On Tue, 9 May 2006, Robert Wirth wrote: just a hint about "sub-optimal" behavior of bacula's storage daemon. There's an autochanger with two LTO-3 tape drives. Sometimes, starting some (mostly identical) jobs in parallel leads to an obscure situation: Are you using an older version of Bacula?

Re: [Bacula-users] storage daemon "sub-optimal" behaviour using 2 tape drives

2006-05-09 Thread Robert Wirth
Hi Alan, > > just a hint about "sub-optimal" behavior of bacula's storage daemon. > > There's an autochanger with two LTO-3 tape drives. Sometimes, starting > > some (mostly identical) jobs in parallel leads to an obscure situation: > > It's not that obscure and is well known in versions prior t

Re: [Bacula-users] storage daemon "sub-optimal" behaviour using 2 tape drives

2006-05-09 Thread Alan Brown
On Tue, 9 May 2006, Robert Wirth wrote: just a hint about "sub-optimal" behavior of bacula's storage daemon. There's an autochanger with two LTO-3 tape drives. Sometimes, starting some (mostly identical) jobs in parallel leads to an obscure situation: It's not that obscure and is well known i

[Bacula-users] storage daemon "sub-optimal" behaviour using 2 tape drives

2006-05-09 Thread Robert Wirth
Hi, just a hint about "sub-optimal" behavior of bacula's storage daemon. There's an autochanger with two LTO-3 tape drives. Sometimes, starting some (mostly identical) jobs in parallel leads to an obscure situation: Although all started jobs go into the same pool and on the same tape, the stora