On 3/22/2011 9:26 AM, Jeff Schmidt wrote:
>
> not to jack this thread, but the concept of 'groups' would be extremely
> beneficial in virtualized environments (let's not backup /all/ of the
> vm's on a single physical host at the same time). I've seen some talk of
> using a semaphore
> (http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT 
> net/msg13698.html), but haven't seen a clear (to me!) implementation of this 
> technique.
> this post of a work-around
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT 
> net/msg16195.html would extend my backup period too long...

Agreed - I've always thought it would be nice if backuppc were aware of 
hosts grouped on a network route as well and could separately limit the 
concurrency within the those groups.   Maybe it could be generalized 
with a concept of how much impact a run will have on total concurrency 
(to limit the overall number in a way that might differ depending on the 
targets) and also within its group to cover bandwidth and other shared 
resource (like VMs) issues.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software 
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker 
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/