>Jamie Burchell wrote on 2018-10-30 09:31:13 -0000 [[BackupPC-users] BackupPC >administrative attention needed email incorrect?]: >> [...] >> Yesterday, I received the following email from the BackupPC process: >> [...] >> > Yesterday 156 hosts were skipped because the file system containing >> > /var/lib/BackupPC/ was too full. [...] >> >> The email was correct in that disk space was low, but the number of >> reported ???hosts skipped??? doesn???t seem right. I have 39 hosts, 152 full >> backups and 952 incrementals. The email says they were skipped, but there >> are no gaps that I can see in any of the backups. Just wondering if this is >> a bug. > >without looking into the code, 156 seems to be 4 * 39 - could it be that >after 4 wakeups disk space dropped low enough for backups to resume (by >backup expiration or someone deleting something from the partition)? That >would explain that there is no gap. You just might find the backups happened >at a slightly later point in time than you would normally expect. > >Hope that helps. > >Regards, >Holger
that makes perfect sense. That wording has caught me off-guard too. I think a more accurate phrasing would be: "Yesterday 156 backups were skipped..." Anyone care to show me how I can submit a simple patch for this in github? The obvious option is to click the pencil icon to edit, but it says I'd be forking the whole project. _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
