On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:26:49PM -0400, George Sinclair wrote:
> I was running some level full backups from several clients in order to 
> test backup speed to a new tape drive. The tape was labeled
> into a test pool and not the normal pools I use, but indexing was not 
> turned off for the pool.  I cancelled the backup after
> a while, but some of the fulls completed. I then relabeled the tape but 
> not before some nightly incremental backups ran and
> completed on those same clients. I then re-ran those incremental backups.
> 
> I assume that some of the later incrementals based their backups on what 
> had changed since those same file systems completed fulls
> in the earlier test, but now with the full volume gone, what do I do? Do 
> I need to do anything?

George, 

My gutshot is that with the full removed, with dangling dependencies,
Networker would remove the orphaned incrementals the next time it did
its index cleanup.  That means any future incrementals would base
themselves off whatever the last good previous state was.  But please
don't take my word for it; test it first.  I've found the unix nwadmin
Index view to the best, fastest way to see backup dependencies.  (You
can kind of generate it from mminfo, but not as quickly and it doesn't
do the indenting.)

In any case, I would probably run some true leveled backup (a full or
numbered backup) to reset the future incrementals to a good state.  If
possible, scheduling a full to proper media is probably the best idea.

Dave

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER