Hello Phil,

I can understand your point, but I still don't consider this a bug.  The 
defiency has been there quite a long time (I have been wondering when someone 
would complain about it).  I am not even sure how one might go about 
resolving the problem:

1. Make manually overriding the Pool when starting a Job take precedence over 
all other Pool specifications?  I don't particularly like that idea.

2. Add several new commands that allow overriding all the different Job level 
pool directives?  I don't much like that either.

Anyway, until I find something I really like and time to implement it will 
remain their -- unless, of course, someone sends a reasonable patch.

Best regards,

Kern

On Monday 28 December 2009 23:48:49 Phil Stracchino wrote:
> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > On Monday 28 December 2009 21:09:49 Phil Stracchino wrote:
> >> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >>> On Monday 28 December 2009 19:57:24 Phil Stracchino wrote:
> >>>> Since I got no response from the users list:
> >>>>
> >>>> When starting a job from the console and modifying the job parameters,
> >>>> the 'modify Pool' operation overrides the 'Pool' directive in the job
> >>>> definition.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It clearly SHOULD also override the 'Full Backup Pool',
> >>>> 'Differential Backup Pool' etc. directives.
> >>>
> >>> I am not convinced that the manual pool override was ever supposed or
> >>> intended to override the other directives you mention.
> >>
> >> If that is the case, then one cannot override the Pool for a manually
> >> job whose definition specifies its level-specific backup pools.  Since
> >> pool overrides in the schedule are now deprecated because of the
> >> problems they caused, it means that users must choose between being able
> >> to specify different Pools for different levels, or being able to
> >> override the pool when running jobs manually for the console.
> >>
> >> I have just performed a test job with the Full/Differential/Incremental
> >> Backup Pool directives in the JobDefs commented out, and it honored the
> >> console modifications and ran to tape exactly as it was supposed to.
> >> This seems to confirm the issue:  'modify Pool' on a console-run job
> >> overrides the Pool directive, but the level-specific Pool override
> >> directives override the Pool manually specified in the console.  Thus,
> >> one cannot override the destination Pool for a manually-started job
> >> whose Job resource specifies per-level Pools.  I would have to consider
> >> this a bug.
> >
> > This is not a bug. You are requesting a feature that has never been
> > implemented -- this was what I was implying in my previous email.
>
> I disagree that this is a new feature.  Let me explain why.
>
> Previously, when the default Pool was specified in the Job definition
> and any necessary Pool overrides for different backup levels were
> specified in the Schedule resource, one could set up pool overrides by
> level that would happen automatically, and still run manual jobs from
> the console to any desired pool.  Which is to say, console modification
> or a manually-started job overrode the previously used Pool-override
> implementation.
>
> Now, Pool overrides in the Schedule resource have been deprecated,
> replaced by overrides in the Job definition.  However, these *cannot* be
> overridden from the console in a manual job.  Thus, replacing Pool
> overrides defined in the Schedule resource with Pool overrides defined
> in the Job resource has resulted in the loss of the ability to override
> the Pool for a manual job.
>
> Yes, *technically* one could say that the ability to override
> Job-resource Pool override directives is new functionality because
> Job-resource Pool overrides didn't exist before.  From a functional
> viewpoint, though, a Pool override which can be manually overridden from
> the console has been replaced with one which cannot.  The only way to
> manually run a Job to a non-default Pool now is to edit the Job
> resource, reload the Director's configuration, run the manual job, then
> restore the original configuration and reload the Director again.  Since
> reloading a Director while jobs are running is hazardous at best, this
> may be impossible on a busy Director.
>
> Thus, previously existing important Console functionality (the ability
> to specify the destination Pool for a manual job that has level-specific
> Pool overrides) has, de facto, been lost as a result of the change from
> Pool overrides in the Schedule to Pool overrides in the job.  This is
> not a case of adding new functionality that did not previously exist.
> It is a case of restoring functionality that has been lost as a
> side-effect of the change of the implementation of Pool overrides.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel

Reply via email to