Bacula-users

[Bacula-users] btape test vs. Offline On Unmount

2012-03-16 20:02:55
Subject: [Bacula-users] btape test vs. Offline On Unmount
From: Tilman Schmidt <t.schmidt AT phoenixsoftware DOT de>
To: bacula-users <bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 01:00:56 +0100
A system I manage, running openSUSE 11.4 x86_64 with vanilla kernel
3.2.8, uses Bacula 5.0.2 for backing up to a Tandberg TS400 standalone
LTO-2 drive connected to an Adaptec 29160 SCSI Adapter, so far using
LTO-1 tape cartridges as the backup volume doesn't require LTO-2 ones yet.

Recently I added the line

 Offline On Unmount = yes;

to the Device resource in bacula-sd.conf since I read on this list that
this is supposed to work alright now. Since then, backups reaching the
end of a tape have reported

--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------
13-Mar 11:06 xenon-sd JobId 333: Error: block.c:577 Write error at
19:34967 on d
evice "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0). ERR=Input/output error.
13-Mar 11:06 xenon-sd JobId 333: Error: Error writing final EOF to tape.
This Volume may not be readable.
dev.c:1745 ioctl MTWEOF error on "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0). ERR=Input/output
error.
13-Mar 11:06 xenon-sd JobId 333: End of medium on Volume "p042-1"
Bytes=59,254,594,560 Blocks=918,504 at 13-Mar-2012 11:06.
--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------

So I decided to run "btape test" which during the "Append files test"
ejected the cartridge and then aborted thusly:

--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------
=== Append files test ===

This test is essential to Bacula.

I'm going to write one record  in file 0,
                   two records in file 1,
             and three records in file 2

btape: btape.c:578 Rewound "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0)
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:608 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0)
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:608 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0)
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:1905 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes.
btape: btape.c:1907 Wrote block to device.
btape: btape.c:608 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0)
17-Mar 00:12 btape: Fatal Error at btape.c:472 because:
dev open failed: dev.c:491 Unable to open device "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0):
ERR=No medium found


Append test failed. Attempting again.
Setting "Hardware End of Medium = no
    and "Fast Forward Space File = no
and retrying append test.



=== Append files test ===

This test is essential to Bacula.

I'm going to write one record  in file 0,
                   two records in file 1,
             and three records in file 2

17-Mar 00:12 btape: ABORTING due to ERROR in dev.c:782
dev.c:781 Bad call to rewind. Device "LTO-2" (/dev/nst0) not open
Bacula interrupted by signal 11: Segmentation violation
Kaboom! btape, btape got signal 11 - Segmentation violation. Attempting
traceback.
Kaboom! exepath=/root
Calling: /root/btraceback /root/btape 21606 /tmp
execv: /root/btraceback failed: ERR=No such file or directory
It looks like the traceback worked ...
Dumping: /tmp/btape.21606.bactrace
btape: lockmgr.c:928 lockmgr disabled
--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------

On a hunch, I removed the line

 Offline On Unmount = yes;

from bacula-sd.conf and reran the test, which this time ran to
completion without a problem.

This prompts two questions on my part:

1. How come bacula-sd.conf influences the operation of "btape test"? The
manpage suggests nothing of the sort.

2. Could the "Error writing final EOF to tape" also be caused by the
"Offline On Unmount" option ejecting the cartridge at the wrong time?
Does that option perhaps not work that well after all? IOW, should I
revert to avoiding that option?

Thanks for any insights,
Tilman

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>