On Wednesday, May 8, 2019 at 2:54:06 AM UTC+3, Nils Jakobson wrote: > I have a bunch of similar windows machines that I need to back up. Naturally > I would like to have some deduplication to avoid backing up same files again > and again. So I backed up clean empty Windows server as a base job. Now when > I run a full backup (the first backup is going to be a full backup > automatically) then in the log it clearly says that it is using base jobs and > how many files from that base job were used for deduplication (excerpt from > log): > > ----8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<--- > > 2019-05-05 13:51:14 pool-director JobId 2384: Using BaseJobId(s): 1 > > 2019-05-05 15:27:06 pool-director JobId 2384: Bareos pool-director > 19.1.2.1551874020.6df58d68c (01Feb19): > JobId: 2384 > Job: soldevqa09.2019-05-04_21.00.00_51 > Backup Level: Full > Client: "soldevqa09" 17.1.3 (01Mar17) Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 > Standard Edition Service Pack 1 (build 7601), 64-bit,Cross-compile,Win64 > FileSet: "Windows All Drives" 2018-12-13 19:20:05 > Pool: "AI_Consolidated" (From Job FullPool override) > Catalog: "MyCatalog" (From Client resource) > Storage: "Consolidated01" (From Pool resource) > Elapsed time: 1 hour 35 mins 51 secs > Priority: 40 > FD Bytes Written: 38,501,279,442 (38.50 GB) > SD Bytes Written: 38,610,804,604 (38.61 GB) > Rate: 6694.7 KB/s > Software Compression: 58.2 % (lzo) > Base files/Used files: 101285/81362 (80.33%) > VSS: yes > Encryption: no > Accurate: yes > > ----8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<--- > > > Now, the very next backup in Always Incremental scheme does not care about > base jobs anymore and backs up all the duplicate stuff that was not backed up > at full backup because it already had these files in Base job. I just noticed > that because next daily incremental after Full backup always is significantly > larger than subsequent daily incrementals. Take look at the query output: > > ----8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<--- > > +-------+------------+-------+---------------------+----------+--------+---------+ > | jobid | client | level | starttime | jobfiles | gb | > volumes | > +-------+------------+-------+---------------------+----------+--------+---------+ > | 32 | soldevqa09 | F | 2018-12-15 16:35:35 | 505,133 | 35.123 | > 53 | > | 396 | soldevqa09 | I | 2018-12-27 06:56:09 | 83,152 | 5.654 | > 12 | > | 220 | soldevqa09 | I | 2018-12-28 06:24:35 | 423 | 0.325 | > 1 | > | 236 | soldevqa09 | I | 2018-12-29 06:40:43 | 423 | 0.325 | > 2 | > | 263 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-01-01 12:31:59 | 637 | 0.329 | > 1 | > | 287 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-01-04 03:25:51 | 1,068 | 0.386 | > 1 | > | 312 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-01-05 01:32:47 | 493 | 0.327 | > 1 | > | 337 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-01-05 10:33:03 | 326 | 0.298 | > 1 | > | 365 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-01-05 19:19:31 | 298 | 0.305 | > 1 | > | 1,401 | soldevqa09 | F | 2019-02-26 08:17:56 | 508,974 | 40.382 | > 81 | > | 2,392 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-04-25 03:44:36 | 24,450 | 7.039 | > 15 | > | 2,216 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-04-26 03:40:34 | 545 | 0.197 | > 1 | > | 2,239 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-04-27 03:44:02 | 722 | 0.197 | > 3 | > | 2,265 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-04-30 04:07:52 | 1,125 | 0.200 | > 1 | > | 2,289 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-05-01 04:06:18 | 2,307 | 0.198 | > 1 | > | 2,313 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-05-02 04:17:25 | 583 | 0.275 | > 1 | > | 2,337 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-05-03 04:23:57 | 4,215 | 0.227 | > 1 | > | 2,361 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-05-04 04:27:54 | 2,061 | 0.200 | > 1 | > | 2,384 | soldevqa09 | F | 2019-05-05 13:51:14 | 510,473 | 35.857 | > 54 | > | 2,410 | soldevqa09 | I | 2019-05-07 04:53:22 | 82,097 | 5.666 | > 12 | > +-------+------------+-------+---------------------+----------+--------+---------+ > > ----8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<-------8<--- > > > Is this a bug or Always Incremental has never been designed to play well with > Base jobs or I am doing something wrong here? > > Thanks. > Neal
Welcome to the club ! AlwaysInc is definitely buggy even before using de-duplication base job. There are a lot of open issues similar to yours (example https://bugs.bareos.org/view.php?id=907 ) I have similar issue in this thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bareos-users/PMuqXDqUAWQ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bareos-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bareos-users/ea3d0281-6e03-4041-a94a-1ecadb1b07e1%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
