Bacula-users

[Bacula-users] Limiting only despooling|writing concurrent jobs.

2012-11-06 03:07:16
Subject: [Bacula-users] Limiting only despooling|writing concurrent jobs.
From: ALyarskiy <bacula-forum AT backupcentral DOT com>
To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:02:44 -0800
Zitat von ALyarskiy <bacula-forum < at > backupcentral.com>: 

Zitat von ALyarskiy <bacula-forum < at > backupcentral.com>: 

How can i limit writing jobs to 1 without limiting spooling jobs? 

I want to have only one job writing on the tape but spool other jobs 
in parallel. 

This is the default as far as i understand. The tape is locked 
exclusive from one writer while other jobs which run concurrently will 
spool data as long as the maximum spool size is not reached. Works 
fine here but you need a really fast spool area if you want to feed 
something like LTO-4/5/6 at full speed. 

Regards 

Andreas 


It is true for jobs with SpoolData=yes, but i have few jobs that 
have SpoolData=no, so they write data right on the tape. 
I want to limit jobs that have SpoolData=no by 1 concurrent, so only 
1 job could write data on the tape, and permit the rest jobs with 
SpoolData=yes to spool data on local drive concurrently (5-7 streams). 

You might try the "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" directive for the tape 
device but i guess with this you will block the despooling until all 
non spooling jobs have passed. Why do you want to have spooling and 
non-spooling jobs anyway for the same device? 

Regards 

Andreas 

Yes, now i use "Maximum Concurrent Jobs" limitation on device level.
I want to write large jobs right on tape ( usually > 50 Gb) - there are no 
network bottlenecks for this clients, and the rest (there are may be networks 
bottlenecks sometimes) spool to the local drive.

When local spool used backup process have to read from client, write on local 
drive, then read from it and write the backup to the tape. For large backups it 
is HUGE overhead. Also there is problem when you have 4-5 large backups in same 
time - local drive becomes bottleneck (i have 2 Gb network). So it is 
reasonable to have a possibility to limit concurrent jobs at different levels. 
For example - 6 Jobs running in same time, 2 of them are large and writing 
directly to the tape one by one, rest 4 are spooling to local drive and waiting 
those 2 to complete.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------
|This was sent by andrey.liarskiy AT gmail DOT com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Central: Instant, anywhere, Remote PC access and management.
Stay in control, update software, and manage PCs from one command center
Diagnose problems and improve visibility into emerging IT issues
Automate, monitor and manage. Do more in less time with Central
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein12331_d2d
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users