> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Simmons [mailto:martin AT lispworks DOT com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 10:47 AM
> To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] SD Losing Track of Pool
> 
> >>>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:18:35 -0700, Peter Zenge said:
> >
> > Admittedly I confused the issue by posting an example with two Pools
> > involved.  Even in that example though, there were jobs using the
> same pool
> > as the mounted volume, and they wouldn't run until the 2 current jobs
> were
> > done (which presumably allowed the SD to re-mount the same volume,
> set the
> > current mounted pool correctly, and then 4 jobs were able to write to
> that
> > volume concurrently, as designed.
> >
> > I saw this issue two other times that day; each time the SD changed
> the
> > mounted pool from "LF-Inc" to "*unknown*" and that brought
> concurrency to a
> > screeching halt.
> 
> Sorry, I see what you mean now -- 18040 should be running.  Did it run
> eventually, without intervention?
> 
> I can't see why the pool name has been set to unknown.
> 
> __Martin
> 


It did run eventually and without intervention.  And while running the SD did 
show the correct pool.  My problem is that without concurrency I don't get 
efficient use of my available bandwidth, and my backup window (already measured 
in days) is longer than it otherwise needs to be even though the same amount of 
data is backed up.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks
Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand 
malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you 
can protect your company and customers by using code signing.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users