Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:24:37 -0400
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:23 AM, John Drescher<drescherjm AT gmail DOT com> wrote: I should have said more than 1 pool to operate concurrently with disk. John M. Drescher -- John M. Drescher -- ____
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:48:43 +0300
for Yes, in this case we are about to ask ourselves what are pools - to my mind pools are collections of backup-files and policies about how to overwrite these files. Eg. if we want to do ordinary Gr
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:10:35 -0400
There is no such limit. If you want more than one pool to write concurrently have more than 1 storage device. With disks you can have as many as you want. They can all point to the same physical sto
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:18:30 +0300
has don't I meant the configuration limit - that I can't configure one device to accept multiple jobs concurrently. -- Silver -- _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing l
Author: Christian Gaul <christian.gaul AT otop DOT de>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:28:28 +0200
Silver Salonen schrieb: I seem to be writing to disk based volumes just fine with multiple (5+) concurrent jobs. Maybe i am misunderstanding something, but the problem isnt N jobs to 1 (disk based) v
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:51:21 +0300
has don't I meant the limitation from the configuration point of view - you cannot configure a device to accept multiple jobs concurrently. If you want to be able to actually do it, you have to "hack
Author: Christian Gaul <christian.gaul AT otop DOT de>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:00:23 +0200
Silver Salonen schrieb: I think i understand what you mean, but you actually can accept multiple jobs to the same device.. just not to different pools. But you are right, since it's disk volumes, one
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:41:10 -0400
I do this every single day at home. 5 jobs concurrently write to the same exact volume. -- John M. Drescher -- _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users
That is not how I understand GFS system, although it is a possibility. I understand it as Full, plus (incremental OR differential). So important clients (like secretary's machine) receive a full back
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:48:47 +0300
OK, yes.. you may do it as this too, but the point in this context was that we need multiple pools. In my case I need one pool for full backups, one for differentials and one for incrementals. In you
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:50:56 +0300
accept -- Silver -- _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
No, there is no must or requirement for seperate pools. I could simply back everything up to the one big pool and allow bacula to tell me which tape to load next. As I understand it, when bacula has
Umm, a Volume is not a pool. A pool is a collection of volumes. I suspect you have a different idea of what a "backup system" consists of, as per your GFS post. The technology doesn't define the defi
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:26:49 -0400
Again there is no big limitation with disk. To achieve concurrency on a single device (tape, dvd or disk) you need a single volume and all jobs must be of the same priority. As a result of the requi
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:45:39 +0300
that we for Um.. we have different basics of our discussion - you use tapes, I use disks, so I expect Bacula to handle volumes and pools differently than in your case. -- Silver -- __________________
Author: Silver Salonen <silver AT ultrasoft DOT ee>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:39:53 +0300
multiple Yes, exactly, but to my mind this is a configuration "hack" - when I add new pools, I have to remember that new devices must be added for these too, because that's the way Bacula does it. Hm
Irelevant, really. If you are running a backup system, you essentially handle them the same way; as rotated recepticals for data. The only real difference with a hard disk is that you no longer have