Attila Fülöp wrote:
> 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.

Answering myself, "RecyclePool = Scratch" should do the trick as it will
avoid any usable tapes in the pool. It has a minor annoyance though and I'm
wondering if there is another way.

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