timo-news AT tee-en DOT net ("Timo Neuvonen") writes:
> "Simon J Mudd" <sjmudd AT pobox DOT com> kirjoitti viestissä
...
> > Yes, but that's what I'm trying to avoid. I realise that I MUST have
> > sufficient
> > space really for at least 2 full backups plus some extra for incrementals
> > but I don't want to worry about the details. Therefore I want to configure
>
> You said you don't want to worry about the details. However, one such very
> strong detail is the schedule you already have specified, it says to run a
> full backup once a month. Required retention time is closely related to
> this, and needs to be specified too.
Again, I think you're missing the point. You are right, in a business
environment you do want to decide to do X full backups every certain
period of time, X incrementals etc. and then you need to do some
calculations to work out how much disk space you need for this. This
value of course changes and you may later need to add more storage or
tapes or whatever to accommodate these changes.
Think of the normal HOME user who may have an interest in Bacula to
backup data. He has a "unix" PC with disks occupying say 100GB of
space. So he buys himself a 1TB external USB disk and wants to use
that for backups. If it's dedicated he'll want to use ALL the space
for backups and keep as much as he can. So he's likely to want to do
perhaps a single weekly or monthly backup followed by incrementals in
between. Exactly how many backups he keeps is relatively unimportant.
And for this type of scenario bacula is tricky (from what I can see)
to setup. I've had multiple problems (due to misconfiguration) of bacula
not labelling new disk devices in the pool and also when the disk starts
to fill up of not removing the oldest backups.
I'm not a backup "administrator" and have plenty of other distractions
which prevent me properly working out how to get bacula running properly.
That's why I suggested a recipe for the type of configuration I suggest
might be extremely useful.
> Since now you haven't specified the volume retention, Bacula uses its
> internal default which is one year, 365 days. You have to specify a shorter
> volume retention time if you want to be able to recycle the volumes sooner.
But I dont' want retention to depend on time, but disk usage.
...
> Btw, you can use "list media" command to see the status of the existing
> volumes.
so while you can define how many volumes to have and their sizes you can't
get bacula to purge based on these values?
...
> > the "pool" to auto purge if it fills up. New full or incremental backups
> > will create new volumes as needed, and the older ones will get purged.
>
> Actually, Bacula will recycle the existing volumes, that is, discard the old
> data in the volume, and use the same "recycled" volume again. So the volume
> name won't change (unless this is possible due to some very new Bacula
> feature).
That's fine. In the end I don't care howe the volumes are labelled, or if
new ones are created or existing ones are reused.
> Within reasonable limits (reasonable amount of disk space available), this
> should be possible with Bacula.
So it sounds part of my problem has been to misunderstand the precise terms
used in Bacula. It sounds like I don't want to purge the disk volumes, but
to recycle them. So how do I configure this:
- A fixed number of disk volumes of a predetermined size which will
be "recycled" when no more space is left? Ideally the recycling in this simple
case would be based on a FIFO type principal.
Simon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience,
a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing.
Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
