>>>>> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 08:31:21 +1300, Craig Miskell said:
> 
> Martin Simmons wrote:
>
> > What "Max Volume jobs" is set for 000006L4?  It seems to think this has been
> > exceeded immediately after it was recycled.
> Set to 1 for both jobs, so it is exceeded as soon as the volume starts 
> getting written to.  That has always seemed 
> correct behaviour to me; am I missing something?
> 
> I must say this setting combined with observed behaviour confused me for a 
> while too (i.e. why was it interleaving with 
> that set), but I found some comments on the mailing list a few years back on 
> race conditions and not using "max volume 
> jobs" to avoid interleaving which made some sense.  And I expect I've run 
> into much the same sort of race condition, 
> with some extra mildly unfortunate consequences.

Yes it is OK in theory, but race condition bugs might generate this
misbehaviour.


> Anyway, my original intent was one job per tape, and that's what I'm back to 
> now.  The solution in this case was to set 
> Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1 on the Drive configuration, as the most reliable 
> (to my mind) way to avoid interleaving, 
> which means each job ends up using the volume it reserved when it started.  
> That worked properly last night, so I'm 
> pretty happy now.  Hope that helps someone else someday.

Right.  Setting it on the Drive is also the best way to force it to use both
drives simultaneously.

__Martin

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users