On Fri, 2021-10-22 at 21:34 -0400, Brock Palen wrote: > In my experense incremental will pull in every job related to that > client. > > I actually use this as a failsafe. I have a VirtualFull job that I > set to an Archive job. > > When I have had media failures, or other (cough) self induced > wounds, I set the archive job back to backup and run a new virtual > full. > I have also used this behavior to migrate systems from traditional > backup to always incremental. > Thanks for this tip.
> I think that’s just how it works currently. I think there is > probably a way to have two job definitions for a single host and keep > them separate. > I do have a few hosts that I have mulitple jobs defined for, that > appears to work. > Thanks for the response Brock. What I've currently done is create a separate client config for each client just for doing always- incremental. I'll see how that works over time. > > Brock Palen > [email protected] > www.mlds-networks.com > Websites, Linux, Hosting, Joomla, Consulting > > > > > On Oct 22, 2021, at 8:12 PM, Matt Ivie <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2021-10-20 at 10:39 -0700, 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? > > > > > > > I could be running up against a bug I'm unaware of or I could be > > mis- > > understanding the way that Always Incremental backups work. When a > > consolidate job runs it is grabbing ALL backups for a client > > whether > > the jobs they are associated with are "Always Incremental" jobs or > > not. > > > > Does anyone know anything about this or have any experience with > > this > > problem? > > > > If I simply need to define a new client to match my "Always > > Incremental" jobs then that's what I'll do. It just seemed logical > > that > > the consolidate job would leave backups alone if they weren't part > > of > > the "Always Incremental" backups for a client. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > -- > > "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/5213981bbe1ad49fb44917d179d3044177923471.camel%40mykolab.com > > . -- "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/37e5a6db3d7c862066acf2f071198f172857dc20.camel%40mykolab.com.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
