Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] confused about differentials

2015-05-13 02:26:04
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] confused about differentials
From: Radosław Korzeniewski <radoslaw AT korzeniewski DOT net>
To: Ian Young <ian AT iay.org DOT uk>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 08:20:56 +0200
Hello,

2015-05-12 10:25 GMT+02:00 Ian Young <ian AT iay.org DOT uk>:

The director is running on a CentOS 6 system and claims to be Bacula 5.0.0. The client is CentOS 7 and Bacula 5.2.x, but looking at the jobs for other systems they also seem to have inconsistencies like this.

It is unsupported configuration. Your any client (Bacula FD) version shouldn't be a newest version then Director/Storage.

This could be a core problem in your case.

I appear to be seeing the same problem with CentOS 6 / CentOS 6 combinations:


OS versions doesn't matter. What is important: Bacula Dir/SD vs. File Daemon versions. The supported configuration require Dir/SD in the same version every time and FD not newer.
 
First - UPGRADE YOUR BACULA DIRECTOR/STORAGE! it is more then 5 years old!!! :)

The headline version of packages shipped with enterprise distributions is often pretty ancient, that's the tradeoff you pay for stability.


Well, as you wish. Unfortunate Bacula 5.0.0 is not a best example. :)
 
I take your point, though, that the Director/SD should not be older than the clients, so I need to fix that. Fortunately the (virtual) machine running the Director and Storage daemons is dedicated to that task, so it should be relatively easy to build a new CentOS 7 machine to get 5.2.13.

Recommended version in May 2015 is Bacula 7.0.5, not 5.2.13.
 

I don't think I actually have a version mismatch problem (as I'm seeing the same issue with matched versions), but there are all sorts of reasons this might make my problem go away: there may be a bug in the version of 5.0 shipped with RHEL/CentOS, or I may have a configuration problem. Either way, starting from scratch and transitioning clients over may help.

First of all. Did you ever test that it is not working? Differential backup does not backup a files which were deleted in the mean time. So in real system it is very unlikely (it must meet a specific conditions) you get the same number of files backed up in Incremental and Differential levels.
 

In the meanwhile, I'll probably just stop using differentials.


:)

best regards 
-- 
Radosław Korzeniewski
radoslaw AT korzeniewski DOT net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users