>>>>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 14:11:12 +0100, Keith Edmunds said:
> 
> We're seeing some odd sizes reported for incremental backups. A 'status
> jobs' shows, firstly, for a full backup:
> 
>    338  Full   19,796,396    2.916 T  OK       06-Apr-09 04:07 Client1
> 
> That looks right: nearly 20 million files and nearly 3Tb.
> 
> Now an incremental:
> 
>    340  Incr      1,085    1.313 T  OK       07-Apr-09 13:10 Client1
> 
> Just over a thousand files (believable) but 1.3Tb of data (not
> believable). That would suggest an average file size of over a gigabyte
> whereas the full back suggests an average file size of around 150K, which
> is much more believable. Quite apart from anything else, it's unlikely
> that 1.3Tb would even fit on an AIT5 tape.
> 
> Whilst the backups seem to run successfully, it would be good to fix this
> erroneous reporting. Any suggestions for doing so would be appreciated.
> 
> Bacula 2.4.2

Average file size is misleading, e.g. you might have a very sparse file that
is over 1 TB.  Also, AIT5 claims to get 1 TB compressed, so 1.3 TB of sparse
data could easily compress.

What does list jobs show?

You could also try running bls with no j or k option, which will list the
files and their sizes.

If this is an Linux system backup, then check the size of /var/log/lastlog.

__Martin

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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