Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] documentation clarification

2008-05-23 01:14:41
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] documentation clarification
From: sporkman <spork AT bway DOT net>
To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 22:14:29 -0700 (PDT)

Kern Sibbald wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 13 May 2008 00:02:00 Charles Sprickman wrote:
>> Hello Kern,
>>
>> I really, really hate to bug you directly, but is there any chance you
>> could look at this thread and give a definitive answer on what determines
>> the purge time for a volume (and what's contained in the catalog for that
>> volume)?
>>
>> http://www.nabble.com/Volume-purged%2C-why--to17039840.html#a17042599
> 
> Well, I think it is reasonably clearly spelled out in the manual.  The key
> to 
> understanding it is to remember that the retention time for a Volume (or
> the 
> other items) pertains to the records in the catalog.  So, once all the
> file 
> and job records in the catalog corresponding to a Volume are pruned, in 
> effect the Volume is purged.  In older Bacula's this would not be
> recognized 
> until the volume was needed again.  However, in 2.2. after each pruning, 
> Bacula specifically checks if all the records for the Volume are pruned
> and 
> if so marks the volume as purged.
> 
> In thinking about it, this might have subtly change the concept of Volume 
> Retention period since if I am not mistaken, currently the Volume can be 
> marked Purged before the Volume retention period expires (that would need
> to 
> be confirmed).  If the jist of your email is that you don't want the
> Volume 
> to be recycled until a particular period expires, perhaps we need to think 
> about having a Recycle Period ...  or defined the Volume retention period
> to 
> be the period that must expire before the volume can be recycled
> regardless 
> of its purged status.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Kern
> 

OK, I think I have this straight at this point.  As usual, the flexibility
of bacula is what ends up confusing me. :)

First of all a quick suggestion on the chapter that covers automatic volume
recycling.  This is what got me:

"The Volume Retention period takes precedence over any Job Retention period
you have specified in the Client resource."

That is correct, but only in the case where the volume retention period is
*shorter* than the file or job retention periods.  Meaning that if your file
retention period was 30 days, your job retention period was 60 days and your
volume retention period was 10 days, you'd purge files/jobs from the catalog
in 10 days when that volume is recycled.  But if you have the file retention
period at 30, job retention at 60 and volume retention at 365, your files
will purge at 30 days, jobs at 60 and the volume retention is meaningless as
far as what's in the catalog.  Correct?

So in my case where I've got daily (incremental), weekly (differential) and
monthly (full) pools and I want to keep my monthlies for a full year, I
should be setting my job retention to 365 days.  I would then rely on the
volume retention period on the daily and weekly pools to purge these
file/job records from the catalog as the volumes are purged, right?  I think
I've got this.

I also wanted to know if I have this bit of information right, as I did not
quite find it in the manual.  When  file records are deleted from the
catalog but job records remain, you can still do a restore without scanning
the tape, but you *must* restore the whole backup job, correct?

And lastly, how does one know when they are keeping stuff in the catalog for
too long?  Just wait until postgres starts to get cranky and slow?  Is "list
jobtotals" showing me all jobs/files in the catalog in this output?

+-------+------------+--------------+
| jobs  | files      | bytes        |
+-------+------------+--------------+
| 1,996 | 19,125,097 | 869589035834 |
+-------+------------+--------------+

Thanks so much for your help...

Charles
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-documentation-clarification-tp17251532p17418845.html
Sent from the Bacula - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>