Re: [Bacula-users] confused about differentials

On 13 May 2015, at 07:20, Radosław Korzeniewski <radoslaw AT korzeniewski DOT net> wrote:

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.

I should have been clearer. I meant that I was apparently seeing the same problem on at least one setup where the FD, DIR and SD versions were all the same.

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 understand that, but deploying 7.0.5 would be significantly harder in my environment than moving to 5.2.13 so it would be something of a last resort.

I don't think you're saying that I need to move to the latest version to get reliable backups, are you?

If anyone knew of a bug in 5.2.x (or for that matter in 5.0.x) that caused differentials to be incomplete, I'd obviously feel differently (but then, I imagine Red Hat would too, as 5.2.13 is what they are shipping in their most recent release).

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?

As stated, I have seen significant data loss when attempting to restore a production system. This is not theoretical, although perhaps the subject line led you astray.

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.

I don't believe this is the problem I'm seeing. For example, from my original mail:

| 9,929 | srv-c701-backup | 2015-05-01 23:05:04 | B | I | 91,030 | 3,450,906,888 | T
| 9,938 | srv-c701-backup | 2015-05-02 23:05:03 | B | D | 112 | 2,184,302 | T

The 91,000 files in job 9929 were NOT all deleted before job 9938 was run, but do not appear in that job.

-- Ian

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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