On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 16:44 +0100, Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote:
> On 20/10/2021 18:39, Matt Ivie wrote:
> > I am running Bareos 16.2.5 under Debian 10 (Buster) and have
> > configured
> > normal Full, Diff, Inc backups for all of my clients to run on a
> > local
> > storage daemon. I have configured a remote (within network, but
> > different building) storage daemon and created Always Incremental
> > jobs
> > to be stored on that SD. The problem I'm having is that when the
> > consolidate job runs, one client keeps having all backups from all
> > jobs
> > included. I can't seem to find a reason why all of the additional
> > backups are being selected, but they are.
> > 
> > I checked the jobs and they are not always incremental jobs and
> > I've
> > explicitly set Always Incremental = no on those jobs.
> > 
> > What can I do to verify why the logic of the consolidate job is
> > picking
> > up these extra jobs?
> > 
> Matt,
> 
> My understanding of Always Incremental is that running the job
> flagged 
> that way never causes a non-Incremental backup to be requested (as
> would 
> normally be the case when Incr's are promoted to Diff or Full
> depending 
> on the config). It doesn't preclude other jobs being run on the same 
> client and fileset. When a consolidate job is being run, I would
> expect 
> it to use all the jobs available to create the best consolidation 
> possible, ie. I would expect the behaviour you observed, because it
> will 
> take into account all versions & changes to the files.
> 
> Why is it important to only include the jobs run as 'always
> incremental'?
> 
For one client I had multiple different jobs configured for different
types of backups. I had one job running off site, hence the desire to
use always incremental, and one locally. They were both using the same
client and fileset configurations.

> Have you tried running the Always Incremental job using a 
> differently-named Fileset (though possibly defining the same files).
> I 
> *think* bareos partitions backups not on the files covered but on
> the 
> fileset name.
> 
I did try just changing the fileset and that didn't seem to work. What
I finally ended up doing was defining a separate client configuration
for my always-incremental backups. I'll see how that works but I don't
see why they would intermingle.

> Lastly, bareos 16 is rather ancient and there have been a lot of bug 
> fixes since then, together with a few new features. I would
> encourage 
> you to update to at least 18, and preferably 20, in the near future.
> In 
> my experience I have not had compatibility problems when doing so
> (given 
> the usual "dir.ver == store.ver").
> 
This is good to know, thank you for the info.

> Ruth
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ruth Ivimey-Cook
> Magazine Editor, Software Consultant
> Blog: http://www.ivimey.org/blog
> 
-- 
"Under the sky, under the heavens there is but one family."
        --Bruce Lee

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bareos-users/5a2e1a995426effd40e4a5f0ea154807c02e2c17.camel%40mykolab.com.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to