Bacula-users

[Bacula-users] Misc

2014-05-23 10:18:13
Subject: [Bacula-users] Misc
From: Kern Sibbald <kern AT sibbald DOT com>
To: Josip Deanovic <djosip+news AT linuxpages DOT net>, bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 16:14:50 +0200
Hello Josip,

Thanks for confirming that SD -> SD and the cancel issues are fixed in
the current repo.  I will release a version 7.0.4 as soon as I am back
from vacation (first few days of June).

I haven't worked on the Next Pool directive issue yet -- it is next on
my list.

Best regards,
Kern

PS: I think you added a note to the "status storage" "bug".  Since it is
very easy for me to simply close a bug report ( easier than changing
something :-)  ), I recommend that you state the issue and your
arguments why you do not like what I changed and send it to the
bacula-users and bacula-devel lists. I am willing to put it back to what
we had before, but I would like to explain why the current behavior,
though slightly strange at first is more correct, and I will explain the
design error I made in Bacula that lead to the ambiguity between Storage
daemons and Storage devices which is at the root of the problem -- I
also have some ideas on how to fix it, but not without some changes to
the Director's conf file. 

On 05/23/2014 04:05 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote:
> Quoting message written on Friday 2014-05-23 15:56:07:
>> I have completed storage to storage tests and everything looks OK now.
>>
>> This is what I have tested:
>> - normal copy job from one pool to an additional pool on the same SD
>> - copy job from default pool located on the "primary" SD to the other
>>   pool located on the additional SD, on the same server
>> - copy from from the pool located on the "local" storage daemon to the
>>   pool located on the remote storage daemon (on the remote server).
>>
>> All storage resources were configured to use dedicated device and all
>> devices were configured to use unique Media Type.
>>
>>
>> Kern, thank you for the effort invested in fixing this issue.
> Ah yes, I forgot to mention that Next Pool directive is still
> ignored when set in the copy job resource.
>
> If it's set up with the value of the pool that does not exist
> it will produce an error, otherwise it will be ignored.
>
>
> Regards
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users