On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 05:02:48AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Jason Dixon wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:54:01PM -0400, John Lockard wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:11:55PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> >>
> Running Jobs:
> JobId Level Name
Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:54:01PM -0400, John Lockard wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:11:55PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
>>
Running Jobs:
JobId Level Name Status
=
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:11:55PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:46:49PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> >
> > Just to be certain, I kicked off a few OS jobs just prior to the
> > transaction log backup. I also changed the Storage directive to use
> > "Maximum Concurrent Jobs
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:54:01PM -0400, John Lockard wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:11:55PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> > >
> > > Running Jobs:
> > > JobId Level Name Status
> > > ==
> > > 11239 In
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:46:49PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
>
> Just to be certain, I kicked off a few OS jobs just prior to the
> transaction log backup. I also changed the Storage directive to use
> "Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1" for FileStorage. This forces only one OS
> job at a time.
>
> I
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 02:37:06PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> > Jason Dixon wrote:
> > >
> > > Here is an example from yesterday. Job 11174 is the transaction logs.
> > > The others are OS jobs I ran manually from bconsole.
> > >
> >
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Jason Dixon wrote:
> >
> > Here is an example from yesterday. Job 11174 is the transaction logs.
> > The others are OS jobs I ran manually from bconsole.
> >
> > Running Jobs:
> > JobId Level Name Status
> > ==
Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 06:56:38AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
>
>> Jason Dixon wrote:
>>
>>> They don't. Previously, the OS backups and the log backups each had
>>> their own pool on the same storage device (tape drive). Recently, the
>>> OS backups have used their own
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 06:56:38AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Jason Dixon wrote:
> >
> > They don't. Previously, the OS backups and the log backups each had
> > their own pool on the same storage device (tape drive). Recently, the
> > OS backups have used their own pool on a File device instead.
Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:51:58AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
>
>> Jason Dixon wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
>>>
>>>
Jason Dixon wrote:
> I've tried that. But since the scheduled OS
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:51:58AM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Jason Dixon wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> >
> >> Jason Dixon wrote:
> >>
> >>> I've tried that. But since the scheduled OS backup jobs are already
> >>> running, the client-initiated
Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
>
>> Jason Dixon wrote:
>>
>>> I've tried that. But since the scheduled OS backup jobs are already
>>> running, the client-initiated transaction log jobs are forced to wait.
>>>
>>>
>> Then you prob
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Jason Dixon wrote:
> >
> > I've tried that. But since the scheduled OS backup jobs are already
> > running, the client-initiated transaction log jobs are forced to wait.
> >
> Then you probaby still had a Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1
Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 03:41:10PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
>
>> If you are using a single tape drive, you will have an issue.
>>
>> One thing you could theoretically do is configure the storage daemon,
>> storage resource, job, and pool all for multiple concurrent jobs. T
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 03:41:10PM -0700, Kevin Keane wrote:
> If you are using a single tape drive, you will have an issue.
>
> One thing you could theoretically do is configure the storage daemon,
> storage resource, job, and pool all for multiple concurrent jobs. The
> bacula manual explains
If you are using a single tape drive, you will have an issue.
One thing you could theoretically do is configure the storage daemon,
storage resource, job, and pool all for multiple concurrent jobs. The
bacula manual explains how to do that. But I'm not sure if that really
gives you the results
16 matches
Mail list logo