On 07/26/14 14:11, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Once a volume is marked disabled, Bacula should do *nothing* with it.

Right, I guess I kind of agree with this sentiment.

My problem was that since Bacula was abiding by and acting on retention
periods, I came to the conclusion that their scratch pool assignments should
also be heeded.

I am OK with the idea of Bacula doing nothing with disabled volumes, but that
leads us to the next dilemma which you pointed out:

> We
> might even consider if we want to turn off pruning of disabled volumes,
> but I am not sure that would be a good idea as it could lead to a
> catalog that grows.

Which ever decision is made, I'll be OK with it now that I completely
understand what was/is going on with my purged volumes.


Thanks for the quick response Kern.



P.S. Any chance that either, or both of those actions could be options?

Prune Disabled Volumes = y/n
Recycle Disabled Volumes = y/n


Just askin' :)



Bill



--
Bill Arlofski
Reverse Polarity, LLC
http://www.revpol.com/
-- Not responsible for anything below this line --

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users