Hi, 05.09.2007 23:00,, Wes Hardaker wrote:: >>>>>> "AL" == Arno Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > (first: thanks for the help!) > >>> 4) assuming that some of the archives are bad, what's the best way to >>> fix the issue? Can I mark the volume as "Error" and will bacula >>> automatically re-archive the files that were in that volume again on >>> the next run through the various backup schedules? (the brunt of the >>> question is really: do files get re-backed up automatically when a >>> volume is marked in error, or does something else need to be done). > > AL> That won't work. It will be best to check which jobs have their data > AL> on the disks in question (using the 'query' command) and manually > AL> re-run any jobs you need. > > That won't work if it's an incremental backup, right? Because > re-running it will take an incremental from the last one.
Yes. You need either a full backup or one level above what is no longer accessible. >>> 5) Should I give up and buy a tape drive (ha ha; sigh) > > AL> Seriously, in my opinion that would be the best thing to do... even > AL> using a used DLT or LTO drive will probably be more reliable than DVD > AL> backup, and tape backups, in my experience, require much less > AL> administration than DVD ones, so the extra money you spend will result > AL> in less time to operate Bacula in the future. > > Sigh... You're right, of course, but I was trying to do this without a > cost-outlay since I have a DVD writer already ;-) IE, cheap but > functional at-home backup solution. > > Hmm... I wonder if rewriting the DVD backend to write to a ISO mounted > in loopback and then burn the iso would be more reliable. That might be one option, but I guess the main problem is that Bacula simply doesn't handle things very well when the writing-to-disk phase has problems. You'd need something more integrated into the SD, or implement some way to signal "re-try this part to the next disk" to the SD. > It'd take > more scratch disk space, but wouldn't suffer from problems like this. I don't think so... when the actual writing goes wrong for whatever reason, you simply cant't tell the SD to retry the parts still in spool space. > It'd also be a lot slower since you'd have to reburn the whole disk when > you added a part to the ISO. Quite a lot slower - first read the existing contents, integrate the new part to it (possible requiring remastering of the whole file system), then writing the whole image to disk... also an additional strain to the disks themselves. Not to forget the DVD writer - I know that some of them get funny when they get warm :-) Arno -- Arno Lehmann IT-Service Lehmann www.its-lehmann.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
