Hello,

I am not sure, but it sounds like you are proposing that Bacula use a
raw device for storing a Volume. This is possible. There might be a
trivial advantage in terms of performance, but there is no real
advantage or demand to do it.  It is, in general, far better to store
Volumes in a filesystem rather than on a raw disk for a number of
reasons.  It would even be preferable to dedicate a disk to Bacula and
have a filesystem on it such as XFS rather than use it as a raw device.

Maybe you can be more precise about what you want.

By the way, the Bacula code that writes disk and tape is virtually
identical.  Only the open and close and seek is different.  The seeking
on tape devices is far more complex than seeking on a disk, which is
byte oriented (at least at the application level), rather than
file/block oriented as a tape device is.

Best regards,
Kern

On 10/28/2014 03:59 PM, Dmitri Maziuk wrote:
> On 10/28/2014 8:24 AM, Alan Brown wrote:
> ...
>> Tape and disk are different animals and need to be approached differently.
>>
>> Virtual autochangers are a kludge to allow for removable disks but in
>> most configured installations they do _not_ treat those disks in the
>> same way as real tape drives.
> OT comment: I'll probably never understand that, I always thought a 
> block device is a block device and one of the unix's strong points was 
> to abstract away the physical differences and let the same code work 
> with either. AFAICT the only reason they're different (in how SD treats 
> them) is because the software is written that way...
>
> Dima
>
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users