Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs?

On 7/30/25 7:45 AM, Kelly Price wrote: > Thank you! It was the catalog job running at a lower priority that blocked the run queue. I canceled the catalog backup that was set to run and the smaller jobs started. \o/ Hint: You could also have done: `update jobid= priority=10` Which would

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs?

Thank you! It was the catalog job running at a lower priority that blocked the run queue. I canceled the catalog backup that was set to run and the smaller jobs started. Any advice on running the catalog job? Should I set it to the same priority as the other jobs? Thanks, Kelly > On Jul 29, 20

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs?

On 7/29/25 11:07 AM, Kelly Price wrote: Hi I have a number of servers, some which are quite large (50TB+). I also have some servers that are relatively small. I do monthly full backups, weekly differential, and daily incremental backups. The problem I’m having is that the smaller servers

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

On 06/01/2015 01:18 PM, Ana Emília M. Arruda wrote: >>> I have this working here. With automatic labeling. When you submit the >>> jobs, which messeges do you see for the jobs in the "status dir" command A-ha, it says one job is running and 10 "is waiting on max Storage jobs". >>> Just for check

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 2015-05-30 11:21, Ana Emília M. Arruda wrote: > > Hi Dimitri, > > > > I have this working here. With automatic labeling. When you submit the > > jobs, which messeges do you see for the jobs in the "status dir" command > > from bconsole?

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

On 2015-05-30 11:21, Ana Emília M. Arruda wrote: > Hi Dimitri, > > I have this working here. With automatic labeling. When you submit the > jobs, which messeges do you see for the jobs in the "status dir" command > from bconsole? Usually the messeges there tell us something about why > the jobs did

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

Hi Dimitri, I have this working here. With automatic labeling. When you submit the jobs, which messeges do you see for the jobs in the "status dir" command from bconsole? Usually the messeges there tell us something about why the jobs did not start concurrently and what for is the second job waiti

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

On 2015-05-28 21:43, Ana Emília M. Arruda wrote: > Hi Dimitri, > > Maybe this makes no sense, but you said "On #1 I have max concurrent > jobs = 10 in director and storage stanzas". Is this true for #2? Do you > have concurrency enabled in director and storage of #2? Yes. I started with identical

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

Hi Dimitri, Maybe this makes no sense, but you said "On #1 I have max concurrent jobs = 10 in director and storage stanzas". Is this true for #2? Do you have concurrency enabled in director and storage of #2? Best regards, Ana On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 05/28/

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs not working?

On 05/28/2015 12:37 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > ... because the spool in on the (smaller) root > drive. PS. Looking at the logs, on #1 all 10 client jobs start within the same couple of minutes after scheduled time and then backupcatalog job starts 2 hours later when they're done. Times are out

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Monday 03 December 2012 16:34:01 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: > > Zitat von Silver Salonen : > > > On Thursday 29 November 2012 16:28:11 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: > >> > >> Zitat von Radosław Korzeniewski : > >> > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > >> > > >> >> ** > >> >> >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

Zitat von Silver Salonen : > On Thursday 29 November 2012 16:28:11 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: >> >> Zitat von Radosław Korzeniewski : >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen >> > >> >> ** >> >> >> >> On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:43:32 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello,

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs previously working but now only 2

From: Jonathan Horne mailto:jho...@skopos.us>> Date: Monday, December 3, 2012 9:19 AM To: "bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net" mailto:bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net>> Subject: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs previously working but now only 2 A previ

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs previously working but now only 2

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Jonathan Horne wrote: > A previous test build, i had concurrent jobs working, that my systems would > backup 4 at a time. Now that I've taken it down and rebuilt it, I've > obviously missed something because even tho i have: > > Director {

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Thursday 29 November 2012 16:28:11 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: > > Zitat von Radosław Korzeniewski : > > > Hello, > > > > 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > > > >> ** > >> > >> On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:43:32 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

Zitat von Radosław Korzeniewski : > Hello, > > 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > >> ** >> >> On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:43:32 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen >> >> >> > sd1<--dir1 ---> client1 <--- dir2-->sd2 >> >> Is your "client1" a Windows mac

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

Hello, 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > ** > > On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:43:32 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: > > Hello, > > 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > > > > sd1<--dir1 ---> client1 <--- dir2-->sd2 > > Is your "client1" a Windows machine? If so, do you use VSS Enable = Yes in > your Fil

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:43:32 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: Hello, 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > sd1<--dir1 ---> client1 <--- dir2-->sd2 Is your "client1" a Windows machine? If so, do you use VSS Enable = Yes in your FileSet resource? Yes. So, the current limitation of bacula-

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

Hello, 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > ** > > > > sd1<--dir1 ---> client1 <--- dir2-->sd2 > > Is your "client1" a Windows machine? If so, do you use VSS Enable = Yes in > your FileSet resource? > > > Yes. > > > So, the current limitation of bacula-fd client on windows does not permit concur

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:06:28 Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: Hello, 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen On Thursday 29 November 2012 07:58:23 Dan Langille wrote: > On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: > > Hi. > > > > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. > > > > Although

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Thursday 29 November 2012 08:27:16 Dan Langille wrote: > On 2012-11-29 08:18, Silver Salonen wrote: > > On Thursday 29 November 2012 07:58:23 Dan Langille wrote: > >> On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: > >> > Hi. > >> > > >> > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

Hello, 2012/11/29 Silver Salonen > On Thursday 29 November 2012 07:58:23 Dan Langille wrote: > > On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > > > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. > > > > > > Although I've set "Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 10" in FD's > > >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On 2012-11-29 08:18, Silver Salonen wrote: > On Thursday 29 November 2012 07:58:23 Dan Langille wrote: >> On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: >> > Hi. >> > >> > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. >> > >> > Although I've set "Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 10" in FD's >> >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On Thursday 29 November 2012 07:58:23 Dan Langille wrote: > On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: > > Hi. > > > > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. > > > > Although I've set "Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 10" in FD's > > configuration, > > You also have to look at the SD

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs with multiple directors

On 2012-11-29 07:02, Silver Salonen wrote: > Hi. > > I'm backing up some servers with multiple Bacula directors. > > Although I've set "Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 10" in FD's > configuration, You also have to look at the SD and Dir 'maximum concurrent jobs' settings as well. > it seems that these

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs with and without spooling

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:20 AM, Jummo wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a question about data spooling in bacula. > > If a job runs and write directly to tape without spooling (e.g. a Copy Job) > and pool "tape_full" on storage "autochanger1" (two tape drives) and a second > job is started with spooli

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs pooled for no reason?

Le 08/06/2012 14:41, Julien Cochennec a écrit : > Le 08/06/2012 13:54, Uwe Schuerkamp a écrit : >> Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 20 > Ok, I'll do this, thanks. The default value is 1? Great! It works! All Jobs together, thanks a lot! ---

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs pooled for no reason?

Le 08/06/2012 13:54, Uwe Schuerkamp a écrit : > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 20 Ok, I'll do this, thanks. The default value is 1? When you wrote : > (the > output of "stat dir" during a backup run should give you an idea > what's blocking). You mean bconsole, then status, then director? If so I alwa

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs pooled for no reason?

On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 01:43:52PM +0200, Julien Cochennec wrote: > > > Hello Uwe, > I have this element nowhere, where should I put it? > My director has only include links, see below. > I saw many posts about this parameter but it appears sometimes in > device, sometimes in storage, sometimes in

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs pooled for no reason?

Le 08/06/2012 11:21, Uwe Schuerkamp a écrit : > Hello Julien, > > what are your settings for "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" for storage, sd, > director, fd's and so on? What exactly is Bacula waiting for (the > output of "stat dir" during a backup run should give you an idea > what's blocking). > > All

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs pooled for no reason?

On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Julien Cochennec wrote: > Hi, > New to this list and bacula newbie, here almost everything works great, > backup around 50 clients, except one thing. > I followed this example > http://www.bacula.org/fr/dev-manual/Basic_Volume_Management.html#SECTION00122

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs only for Backup Jobs

Hello Adrian, thank you, it works. I've tested this two years ago and it doesn't work as it should work. So I never had a look again about the priorities. Actually I don't know if there was a bug in bacula or in my two years old config. But I still use many parts of my old configuration where the

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs only for Backup Jobs

Hi Markus, On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 09:09:22AM +0100, Markus Kress wrote: > defined sequence. In other words: only the backup and verify jobs should > run concurrently, the admin jobs in a defined sequence before and after all > other jobs. > admin job 1 > admin job 2 > admin job 3 > backup job cli

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs only for Backup Jobs

Op 8/03/2012 9:09, Markus Kress schreef: Hello I did not understand how Maximum Concurrent Jobs works. In special the sentence "Note, this directive limits only Jobs with the same name as the resource in which it appears ". I try to describe what I want. I have some jobs of type admin. They have

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs and multiple volume readers

On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 09:03 +0200, Uwe Mohn wrote: > I'd suggest using different prioritys for your virtual fulls since > bacula won't start a job with a higher bacula priority (means lesser > importance) > before a job with a lower bacula priority (means higher importance) has > terminated. For

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs from differents clients to the same tape

>> I am not using spoolfile because of lack of disk space, i will see >> performance this night without this file, cross my fingers. >> > > When you use a backup to tape it is _always_ recommended to use a data > spooling unless your local disks are slower then backup network and remote > clients.

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs from differents clients to the same tape

Hello, 2011/5/26 Andrés Yacopino > Thanks for replying John. > > I am not using spoolfile because of lack of disk space, i will see > performance this night without this file, cross my fingers. > > When you use a backup to tape it is _always_ recommended to use a data spooling unless your local

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs from differents clients to the same tape

Thanks for replying John. Well, because of your advice i have changed Storage part of bacula-dir to 2 maximum Jobs, thanks for that. I have also realized that having differents priorities on jobs avoid them to run concurrently, so i have put the same priority to all the jobs in this case 1 for all

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs from differents clients to the same tape

> I am backing up 7 servers in daily basis, one of the servers take 5 > hours to backup (the other 6 take 2 hours), so i want to backup the > large server at the same time i am backuping the others servers. > I have one LTO4 drive, and the backups are running secuencially, one > after another from

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs + autochanger

Thanks, I will try a concurrency of 2, combined with 500gb spooling, since the LTO-4 drives are faster than the network. -S -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class lo

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs + autochanger

> Hello, > I'm completely lost regarding the Maximum Concurrent Jobs directive on > multiple places. > > First, my setup: > -Autochanger, about 70 slots > -2 LTO4 Drives inside autochanger > -2 backup Pools defined, and a Scratch pool. pool1 used by Job1 for unix > clients, pool2 used by Job2 and

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs Doubts.

'pedro moreno' wrote: > Hi my friends. > > I have bacula running on my server with Centos x64 5.5 >Raid-5+LTO-2(Tandberg) external. > > My doubts are with bacula-sd concurrent jobs. > > U people that have disk based and tape backups, what is the maximum >jobs are u running on disk or tape at the sa

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs Setup

On Tue, 18 May 2010 12:01:02 -0700 Lampzy wrote: > Right now the jobs are running one by one. I read all the documentation > I can find and still can't figure out how to configure it to spool 4 > jobs simultaneously and de-spool them one by one to the tape drive. I just de-spool them all simul

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to different files

2010/4/23 António Inês Silva : > >  Good morning, > >  Assuming a storage device supported on disk files, would this type of > configuration output each concurrent jobs for the particular storage > into a different file: > > Director configuration > >  Storage { >    Name = DiskFilesStorage >    De

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 19:28:05 John Drescher wrote: > > If volumes were files, there wouldn't be any need to limit them for devices > > which would be directories in that context. > > > > Again the limit is only 1 volume can be loaded in 1 storage device at > a time. This is not that big

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 02/24/10 08:07, Silver Salonen wrote: >> On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: >>> On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? >>> >>> I ran into this

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On 02/24/10 08:07, Silver Salonen wrote: > BTW, this part is very obscure in the manual: > "if you want two different jobs to run simultaneously backing up the same > Client to the same Storage device, they will run concurrently only if you > have > set Maximum Concurrent Jobs greater than one i

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On 02/24/10 08:07, Silver Salonen wrote: > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: >> On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: >>> I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? >> >> I ran into this problem when I first upgraded to 3.0.3. It turned out >> to be

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

> If volumes were files, there wouldn't be any need to limit them for devices > which would be directories in that context. > Again the limit is only 1 volume can be loaded in 1 storage device at a time. This is not that big of a limitation because with disk you can have 1 storage devices if

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 17:03:58 Josh Fisher wrote: > On 2/24/2010 9:25 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > > It's like assuming that the "ultimate" backup-devices are tapes. And as I > > don't think that way, it's so annoying these design decisions rely on > > somebody's (emotional/historical) opini

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > On Wednesday 24 February 2010 15:58:57 John Drescher wrote: >> > OK. I have never used tapes with Bacula. But I'd expect a file-type device > to >> > be able to load more than 1 volume at a time. It's quite trivial, isn't > it? >> > >> This

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On 2/24/2010 9:25 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > On Wednesday 24 February 2010 15:58:57 John Drescher wrote: > >>> OK. I have never used tapes with Bacula. But I'd expect a file-type device >>> > to > >>> be able to load more than 1 volume at a time. It's quite trivial, isn't >>>

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 16:42:50 John Drescher wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > > What's the use of treating all the devices the same way anyway? Ease of > > programming? Even though it makes this part of the whole project so rigid? > > > > Ease of programmi

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 15:58:57 John Drescher wrote: > > OK. I have never used tapes with Bacula. But I'd expect a file-type device to > > be able to load more than 1 volume at a time. It's quite trivial, isn't it? > > > This was a design decision that all devices are treated the same way.

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

> Are you saying that for concurrent jobs to work I have to run these different > jobs into the same volume? It doesn't make any sense in the means of disk- > based backups. > If they are not the same volume then you need to have more than 1 storage device. Remember that only 1 volume can be loade

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 15:34:27 John Drescher wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:07 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: > >> On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: > >> > I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? >

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

> OK. I have never used tapes with Bacula. But I'd expect a file-type device to > be able to load more than 1 volume at a time. It's quite trivial, isn't it? > This was a design decision that all devices are treated the same way. > > Anyway, the "1 volume at a time"-limit has always been "one job

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:07 AM, Silver Salonen wrote: > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: >> On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: >> > I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? >> >> I ran into this problem when I first upgraded to 3.0.3.  It tur

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: > > I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? > > I ran into this problem when I first upgraded to 3.0.3. It turned out > to be a configuration issue. Make sure you have th

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 13:38:17 Martin Simmons wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:58:22 +0200, Silver Salonen said: > > No, the default for devices has always been to allow only 1 job. > > That's not correct. Bacula has always been able to run multiple concurrent > jobs to the same devi

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:58:22 +0200, Silver Salonen said: > > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 20:45:26 Martin Simmons wrote: > > I think you have the concept backwards -- it is designed to prevent > > concurrency on that device rather than allowing more of it. > > > > The default allows an unlim

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 19:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: > > I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? > > I ran into this problem when I first upgraded to 3.0.3. It turned out > to be a configuration issue. Make sure you have th

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 20:45:26 Martin Simmons wrote: > I think you have the concept backwards -- it is designed to prevent > concurrency on that device rather than allowing more of it. > > The default allows an unlimited number of jobs to be queued (or run > concurrently on a single volume).

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

I think you have the concept backwards -- it is designed to prevent concurrency on that device rather than allowing more of it. The default allows an unlimited number of jobs to be queued (or run concurrently on a single volume). The new resource allows you to force jobs to run on another "compat

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

On 02/23/10 06:32, Silver Salonen wrote: > I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? I ran into this problem when I first upgraded to 3.0.3. It turned out to be a configuration issue. Make sure you have the desired level of concurrency enabled in ALL applicable resources (i.

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

I consider it a bug, but looks like devs do not. Any opinions? http://bugs.bacula.org/view.php?id=1508 -- Silver On Tuesday 16 February 2010 09:56:21 Silver Salonen wrote: > Hi. > > In 5.0 there is directive "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" for devices too, which > should mean that it's now possible

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

I suppose this is true. Sorry, I can't help then. -Original Message- From: Silver Salonen [mailto:sil...@ultrasoft.ee] Sent: 16 February 2010 09:00 To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Beck J Mr Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage I have set ma

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

I have set maximum concurrent jobs in all the mentioned places. The priority is the same too. And if any other limit would have occurred, the message wouldn't be "is waiting on Storage storage-silver", would it? -- Silver On Tuesday 16 February 2010 10:49:46 Beck J Mr wrote: > Silver > > Max

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on the same storage

Silver Maximum Concurrent Jobs must be set on the Director, Storage, Device, Job, and Client. Whichever is lowest will take precedence. Also if the second job has Priority set to a higher number, maximum concurrent jobs will be ignored and it will wait until the first job has completed. James -

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs on two autochangers

T Media Type = Ultrium1 Autochanger = yes Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 2 } -Original Message- From: John Drescher [mailto:dresche...@gmail.com] Sent: 01 November 2009 09:12 To: Brian Jobling; bacula-users Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Co

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs on two autochangers

> We have switched to Bacula from Backup Exec and being software developers > ourselves really appreciate Bacula and how simple it is to get going > quickly. > > We have two autoloaders a TL4000 and a Dell PV132T each system has two > drives in it. > Are the changers attached to different machines?

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs problem

John Drescher wrote: >> I'm trying to figure out why I can't run concurrent jobs on my >> installation. The Director, the FileDaemon and the Storage are all set >> as: >> >> Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 20 >> >> > There are 3 to 5 places you need this in bacula-dir.conf > > did you do that? if not,

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs problem

> I'm trying to figure out why I can't run concurrent jobs on my installation. > The Director, the FileDaemon and the Storage are all set as: > > Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 20 > There are 3 to 5 places you need this in bacula-dir.conf did you do that? John ---

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs

2009/5/14 Jayson Broughton : > I know this question has beened asked a million times on this list (And yes, > I went through the nabble’s bacula-users archives over 2 days) but I think > my situation is slightly alittle more unique.  So if anyone could help me > out, I would appreciate it! > > > >

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs

Michael Zehrer wrote: > Hi, > > I have a question about concurrent jobs. I have two types of backups running > on different schedules. One is a tape backup, that includes several jobs with > different priorities. The other is a disk backup that also includes different > jobs. What I want is tha

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs when using 'one volume per job'

Hi, 16.04.2009 09:04, James Harper wrote: > I am using one disk volume per job, and I would like to run multiple > backups at once. This would require the storage daemon to have multiple > volumes open at once. Right. More in Bacula terms, you'd need several storage devices. > Is this supported?

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs (shouldn't be)

On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: > > If you allow mixed priority jobs to run simultaneously, you also > > need some way of flagging a job as "exclusive" > > this is accomplished by not setting Allow Mixed Priority on > BackupCatalog. OK, it wasn't clear in your earlier description

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs (shouldn't be)

Alan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: > >>This directive is only implemented in version 2.5 and later. When >>set to {\bf yes} (default {\bf no}), this job may run even if lower >>priority jobs are already running. This means a high

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs (shouldn't be)

On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: >This directive is only implemented in version 2.5 and later. When >set to {\bf yes} (default {\bf no}), this job may run even if lower >priority jobs are already running. This means a high priority job >will not have to wait for ot

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent Jobs (shouldn't be)

Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That was just an overview. Each Job is tied to a single client. I > haven't been able to get this working properly yet; the lower > priority jobs always "multiplex" (to use a NetBackup term) > concurrently and force the higher priority job to wait. My pa

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs and priority

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, le dahut wrote: > Does this mean that the second job (the one with a higher priority number) > will be "forgotten" ? or that it will be run once the first job has finished > ? It will be run after the first job is finished.

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs and priority

Does this mean that the second job (the one with a higher priority number) will be "forgotten" ? or that it will be run once the first job has finished ? Alan Brown a écrit : > On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, le dahut wrote: > >> I'll use priority, since both jobs must be based on the same schedule >> inc

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs and priority

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, le dahut wrote: > I'll use priority, since both jobs must be based on the same schedule > included file. If you use differing priorities, only one job will run at a time. - This SF.net email is sponsore

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs and priority

Dan Langille a écrit : > le dahut wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I've a question about running 2 jobs at the same time. >> >> Here's my problem : >> - a simple web interface lets users schedule a backup job >> - this interface writes in "/etc/bacula/myschedule.conf" (which is >> included in bacula-dir.c

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs and priority

le dahut wrote: > Hello, > > I've a question about running 2 jobs at the same time. > > Here's my problem : > - a simple web interface lets users schedule a backup job > - this interface writes in "/etc/bacula/myschedule.conf" (which is > included in bacula-dir.conf) and restarts bacula-dir Ins

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on FreeBSD

Dane Miller wrote: > Is this what you're suggesting... > > > > bacula-dir.conf: > > >Director { Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 10; ... } > > ># include jobs from separate files > > >@/usr/local/etc/bacula/jobs/clientA.job > > >@/usr/local/etc/bacula/jobs/clientB.job > > > > > > bacula-

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on FreeBSD

On 10/1/07, Dane Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Arno Lehmann wrote: > > You need one storage device per job. > > > > Think of storage devices as tapes: One drive can only write to one > > tape at a time. And tape is what Bacula was designed to use. > > > > You can probably easily integrate the

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on FreeBSD

Arno Lehmann wrote: > You need one storage device per job. > > Think of storage devices as tapes: One drive can only write to one > tape at a time. And tape is what Bacula was designed to use. > > You can probably easily integrate the necessary definitions into your > client-specific settings.

Re: [Bacula-users] concurrent jobs on FreeBSD

Hi, 01.10.2007 21:19,, Dane Miller wrote:: > I'm trying to backup multiple clients to disk and would like the jobs to > run simultaneously. Each job writes to a unique volume name (e.g. > clientA-Full-0001, clientB-Diff-0001). > > There are many posts on this subject, so I'm sorry for bringing i

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to disk

Outstanding. Thanks for posting the results. You've demystified a portion of the Migration piece for me. :-) Here's to many happy restores... E~ On Feb 6, 2007, at 5:57 AM, Support wrote: > Erich > > Thanks for the tips - I have just monitored tonights backups of > incrementals and some ful

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to disk

Erich Thanks for the tips - I have just monitored tonights backups of incrementals and some full backup of clients - all went well. I configured one group of incrementals as a migration job and it went without a hitch. The migration to tape was done after all other jobs that wrote to tape after s

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to disk

On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Erich Prinz wrote: > I have two FD which are set to MaxJobs = 1... this forces the second > FD to wait in line until the first one completes. It will also cause "status client = [N]" to wedge if there's a backup in progress on that client (along with any attempts to use bacu

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to disk

Actually, the FD must also match the total number of concurrent connections. I have two FD which are set to MaxJobs = 1... this forces the second FD to wait in line until the first one completes. On the other 6 FD, the MaxJobs is set to 10. This permits all 6 to run concurrently (provided t

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs to disk

There's a section on concurrent jobs in the Tips and Tricks section of the docs. Short version: each config file has an entry for MaxConcurrentJobs = (or something like that) and each entry MUST be configured with the identical number of concurrent jobs in order to work. I've done this an

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

zzano - Milano - ITALY > http://www.sonicle.com > > > > > -- > > Da: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > A: Bacula > Data: 24 gennaio 2007 19.45.43 CET > Oggetto: Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs > > Hi, > >

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

028243880 Via Felice Cavallotti 16 - 20089, Rozzano - Milano - ITALY http://www.sonicle.com -- Da: Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> A: Bacula Data: 24 gennaio 2007 19.45.43 CET Oggetto: Re: [Bacula-users] Concurren

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

> A: Gabriele Bulfon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Bacula Data: 24 gennaio 2007 19.31.04 CET Oggetto: Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs 1. Do you think spooling would let me gain higher results? Yes. What type of network connection are you using? 2. Do you think switching to mysql would be faster?

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > Is there some example for such a configuration available somewhere? > > There are examples in the manual: > http://www.bacula.org/dev-manual/Migration.html#SECTION00294 Arghh... sorry for missing the obvious. And thanks a lot. Bes

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

Hello, On 1/24/2007 10:24 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > >>Implementing a disk to disk to tape setup would be the other choice, now >>that 2.0 is out. > > > Is there some example for such a configuration available somewhere? There are examples in the ma

Re: [Bacula-users] Concurrent jobs

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > Implementing a disk to disk to tape setup would be the other choice, now > that 2.0 is out. Is there some example for such a configuration available somewhere? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems,

  1   2   >