John Drescher wrote:
>> I have seen this once a few months ago on 2.2.8. 

Well, if this is intended behaviour it wouldn't make much sense to me.
I rather would use a tape from the scratch pool than having my backups
fail. Thats what the scratch poll is for IMHO. Operator intervention
should be the last resort in automated backup environments.

 >> However I did not
 >> test this much with earlier versions of bacula because I have a 1 year
 >> (or longer) retention period on the LTO2  volumes and I believe I got
 >> the archive 2 years ago.

I'm pretty (95%) sure bacula 2.0.x  used a tape from the scratch pool
even if there were usable tapes in the pool but not in the changer.

I guess/hope that I'm just missing a newly introduced directive to
reactivate the old behaviour.

>>
> BTW, I know if there are no volumes that can be recycled bacula will
> definitely take media from the scratch pool with 2.2.8 as I have added
> at minimum 10 new tapes since I have upgraded and many of them are now
> in use.

Yes, that would be fine for my long lasting pools but won't help with the
short lived ones. I'm only human and do forget to change tapes once in a
while.

Attila


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users