On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:27:17PM +0100, stefano scotti wrote:
> 
> Thanks Uwe,
> 
> I think i will use one of your workarounds, because they are workarounds.
> 
> The best solution was to allow mixing lower priorities even though an
> higher job is running.
> Something like Allow Lower Mixed Priority directive.
> But if bacula's devolopers didn't think about that, i have to sadly conform.
> 
> Thank you again.
> 

You're welcome ;-) 

I think the "bacula enterprise" edition allows for allotment of
bandwitdth on a job / client level, maybe you'd want to look into
that, too. 

In the years we've been running bacula I've usually found that a
backup job hardly has any impact on the client being backed up unless
it's a very old system and you're using some crazy compression level,
so I wouldn't worry to much about systems being backed up while
they're in active use. You can always require "accurate" backups
followed by a verify job if you want to play it really safe. 



All the best, Uwe 

-- 
NIONEX --- Ein Unternehmen der Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users