On 2019-12-16 10:59, Radosław Korzeniewski wrote: > Hello, > > pt., 13 gru 2019 o 21:05 Phil Stracchino <ph...@caerllewys.net > <mailto:ph...@caerllewys.net>> napisał(a): > > Evaluating selection queries when queued, which may be many hours ahead > of when it actually runs, almost ensures that when the job finally runs, > it runs with stale and probably-incorrect data. > > > You have to remember that a copy job is in reality a three different > jobs: copy control, copy read and copy write.
Is that part of why my archive copy job creates so much noise in my Director messages? :) > Radosław, you didn't answer Martin's question: Can you describe a > realistic case where it is ever better for the user that a Copy job > evaluate its selection criteria when it is queued, rather than when it > actually starts? > > > I show you my case. I run a cyclic copy job every hour and copy all new > jobs which are available right now. I never use a priorities. OK, that WORKS when selection is evaluated at queue time. Does it work BETTER than evaluating at start time? I may consider that approach and see if it works around the problem I'm encountering, but I suspect it means vast amounts of message noise unless I tell the Director not to send notifications on copy jobs, and then I presume I will miss copy failure notices. -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landline: +1.603.293.8485 Mobile: +1.603.998.6958 _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
