Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Feature request: relative rentention times

2009-04-07 16:24:55
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Feature request: relative rentention times
From: Mike Ruskai <thannyd AT earthlink DOT net>
To: bacula-users <bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:18:37 -0400
On 04/07/2009 04:21, Kevin Keane wrote:
> Item  n:  implement retention times specified as number of copies.
>   Date:   4/6/2009
>   Origin: Kevin Keane - subscription at kkeane dot com
>   Status:
>
>    
I very much like this idea.  I have pretty much enough storage for two 
full backups plus incrementals, and that means any changes have to be 
put off until the beginning of the backup cycle.

If I could simply say, "Keep two full backups", it wouldn't matter.
>
>   Notes:  This feature may only makes sense for jobs and files, maybe not for 
> volumes.
>           I haven't fully thought through the implications yet.
>           The interaction between "Keep Copies" and "Volume Retention"
>           needs to be defined.
>    
It wouldn't work at all for my purposes if it weren't also tied to 
volume retention.  Perhaps the volume can be configured to expire as 
soon as all full backups on it expire.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users