Re: [Bacula-users] duplicate full backups
2008-04-07 08:04:22
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:37 AM, Arno Lehmann <al AT its-lehmann DOT de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> 07.04.2008 06:04, Seth Miller wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I recently upgraded to Bacula 2.2.8 and have noticed something has
> > changed. If a full backup has not yet completed and it's time for the
> > next incremental, that incremental is upgraded to a full and starts
> > running as shown below
> >
> >
> > Running Jobs:
> > JobId Level Name Status
> > ======================================================================
> > 77 Full web15.2008-04-04_22.00.42 is running
> > 78 Full web16.2008-04-04_22.00.43 is running
> > 82 Full web20.2008-04-04_22.00.47 is running
> > 84 Full web22.2008-04-04_22.00.49 is running
> > 137 Increme host36.2008-04-06_18.00.56 is running
> > 152 Increme web6.2008-04-06_22.00.11 is running
> > 154 Increme web8.2008-04-06_22.00.13 is running
> > 156 Increme web10.2008-04-06_22.00.15 is running
> > 159 Increme web13.2008-04-06_22.00.18 is running
> > 160 Increme web14.2008-04-06_22.00.19 is running
> > 161 Full web15.2008-04-06_22.00.20 is running
> > 162 Full web16.2008-04-06_22.00.21 is running
> > 163 Increme web17.2008-04-06_22.00.22 is running
> > 165 Increme web19.2008-04-06_22.00.24 is running
> > 166 Full web20.2008-04-06_22.00.25 is running
> > 167 Increme web21.2008-04-06_22.00.26 is running
> > 168 Full web22.2008-04-06_22.00.27 is running
> >
> >
> > The job for web22 for example has been running for 2 days. Most of
> > the other jobs finish in about 16 hours but there are some stragglers
> > with lots of data that take longer. To prevent this I skipped an
> > incremental the day after the full but since it's been 2 days, the
> > next incremental kicked in and was upgraded to a full.
>
> Yes, this is a known issue - not a bug, but definitely something that
> can be improved.
>
> There has been a discussion about this which I can't find in the list
> mail now (so you'll have to search yourself ;-)
>
> I'm rather sure that there will be configuration statements available
> to miodify this behaviour some time, but I'm not sure if this in the
> queue for the next release.
>
>
> > In the past this just caused the second backup to be put on hold until
> > the first finished.
>
> Sure? I don't think I ever observed this. In fact, I'm pretty sure I
> have had to cancel jobs for that exact reason every time I forgot to
> load the correct tapes in the autochanger and so a full backups waits
> all night and is still running when the next incremental one is started.
>
>
> > What's worse is that it's starting all over with
> > a new file as shown below
>
> Yup... this is one good reason to keep your backups small enough they
> can finish in less than 24 hours :-)
>
>
> > alucard web # ls -lh web22-0*
> >
> > -rw-r----- 1 root bacula 430G Apr 6 22:00 web22-0081
> > -rw-r----- 1 root bacula 29G Apr 6 23:04 web22-0162
> >
> > How can I force Bacula to complete a job before it starts a new one
> > for the same client?
>
> You can't, now, I believe.
>
> Arno
>
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Seth
> >
One way you could get around this is to make it so only 1 job can run
at a time for a particular client. This will allow the full backup to
complete and the incremental queued to not actually start until such
job is completed.
But I'd have to agree, what are you backing up that is taking more
than two days? I hope you say you've got terabytes of data streaming
along or there is something else you should be worried about.
-Drew
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Register now and save $200. Hurry, offer ends at 11:59 p.m.,
Monday, April 7! Use priority code J8TLD2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
|
|