> I am playing with disk volumes right now.  I have a full pool set up to
> create volumes with 4G maximum volume size.   I could set up a full pool
> that everything is written to, or I could set up a full pool per client,
> or set up a full pool based on some other criteria.  Unless I would have
> some difference in retention times, I cannot come up with a reason to
> not put everything in one full pool, and let Bacula handle all the
> files.  Thoughts?
>

Good choice on the 4GB. This will allow you to put old volumes on DVD
if you want and remove some temporarily. Also you will not notice a
difference in performance between using many 4GB volumes versus few
100GB volumes. A lot of users go for the bigger volumes but then it
hurts recycling and it also hurts moving files around. I can say that
rsync to a remote server will be better with 4GB volumes versus 100GB.

John

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development
software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users