I asked this question a few weeks ago on the users list but didn't get a response, so thought that I should try here. I am really not sure if I am seeing a bug or that this is something that is not supposed to work.
I have a disk based pool and want to run concurrent backups to this pool. I am currently running backups one job at a time to this pool, but doing the backups this way is starting to take too long. A number of the jobs have runscripts that take a while (a couple of hours in one case) to run. During the time that these scripts are running the Bacula server is doing nothing. I realize that I could configure a separate pool/device for some or all of these jobs and get concurrency that way, but this would complicate copy jobs that run later, hence my desire to do concurrent backups to the same pool. I found this example http://toshine.org/etc/bacula-concurrent-jobs-multiple-storage-devices-client-labeled-pools-debian-installation-configuration/ where multiple devices are configured that use the same disk based pool. This does seem to work in that I do get the desired number of concurrent jobs running, but I get varying numbers of the following messages each time the schedule is run. 20-Nov 00:05 bacula03-sd JobId 9569: Job pfsense03.2013-11-20_00.05.00_31 is waiting. Cannot find any appendable volumes. Please use the "label" command to create a new Volume for: Storage: "FileDevice04" (/bacula_storage/FileDevice) Pool: IncPool Media type: File01 The jobs that I get the messages for vary each time as does the device. The job does retry after 5 minutes and normally runs then. Occasionally I will get a second message for a job, but it always retries and I can not recall ever having a job that didn't run successfully eventually. There are always volumes available. Either existing appendable volumes or capacity with in the pool to create more volumes. I am using the bacula 5.2.13 packages from http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/slaanesh/bacula/epel-6/x86_64/ on Centos 6.4 x86_64 with a Postgresql 8.4 database. Is this approach of having multiple devices utilising the same disk based pool a valid approach to doing concurrent backups or is it not supposed to work? I am happy to provide the full configuration files or any other information that may be required. Thanks Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
