Hello,
You might be interested in checking this thread:
https://sourceforge.net/p/bacula/mailman/message/36386670/
A perl script is mentioned there:
https://github.com/hreinecke/sg3_utils/issues/18 which can provide you
with e.g. daily reports of raw space remaining on tapes.
Thanks,
Adam
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, at 09:44, krashoverr...@free.fr wrote:
> My client has 1.3 To to backup, i'm having an LTO4 drive, meaning 800Go
> native, 1.6To compressed, so I've set my pool to have a Maximum Volume
> Bytes to 1600G
800 GB is the real capacity of an LTO-4 cartridge.
The 1,6 TB "compress
Hey there!
New question for you, about job compression (on tapes)
I'm running Bacula 7.4.4 server, with a 5.2.6 client (and PG db)
My client has 1.3 To to backup, i'm having an LTO4 drive, meaning 800Go native,
1.6To compressed, so I've set my pool to have a Maximum Volume Bytes to 1600G
I've re
I'm currently using this Fileset in my windows servers and it's working fine
(bacula v. 2.4.4).
FileSet {
Name = "XXXFileset"
Enable VSS = yes
Include {
Options {
signature = MD5
compression=GZIP
[--]
> Can you be a little more specific about "don't worl"? What doesn't
> work? Compression? Backups?
>
> If you're not getting compression and you're asking about that, from the
> fragmentary bits of configuration you've posted above you appear to have
> compression both turned on and turned
2010/5/4 Uwe Schuerkamp :
> On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 04:35:20PM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
>> On 05/03/10 06:02, Carlo Filippetto wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > I have a problem,
>> > I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
>> > have no compression
>> >
>> > Software Comp
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 04:35:20PM -0400, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 05/03/10 06:02, Carlo Filippetto wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I have a problem,
> > I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
> > have no compression
> >
> > Software Compression: None
> >
> > while
> >
On 05/03/10 06:02, Carlo Filippetto wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have a problem,
> I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
> have no compression
>
> Software Compression: None
>
> while
>
> FileSet {
> Name = FS-test-windows
> Enable VSS = yes
> Ignore FileSet Chan
On 05/03/10 15:08, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> On 3.5.2010 13:02, Carlo Filippetto wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I have a problem,
>> I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
>> have no compression
>>
>> Software Compression: None
>>
>> while
>>
>> FileSet {
>> Name = FS-test
On 3.5.2010 13:02, Carlo Filippetto wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have a problem,
> I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
> have no compression
>
> Software Compression: None
>
> while
>
> FileSet {
> Name = FS-test-windows
> Enable VSS = yes
> Ignore FileSet Chan
Hi all,
I have a problem,
I had installed bacula 5.0.1. on Winows client, and work fine, but I
have no compression
Software Compression: None
while
FileSet {
Name = FS-test-windows
Enable VSS = yes
Ignore FileSet Changes = no
Include {
File = C:/Programmi/Test
Options {
On 02/10/10 10:36, Sean M Clark wrote:
> xz/lzma is another consideration. At moderate compression levels, lzma
> seems to be about the same or slightly faster than bzip2 with a little
> better compression. At lower compression levels it seems like it's
> about as fast as gzip while compressing n
On 2010Feb10 10:31 AM, John Doe wrote:
> From: Sean M Clark
>> xz/lzma is another consideration. At moderate compression levels, lzma
>> seems to be about the same or slightly faster than bzip2 with a little
>> better compression. At lower compression levels it seems like it's
>> about as fast a
From: Sean M Clark
> xz/lzma is another consideration. At moderate compression levels, lzma
> seems to be about the same or slightly faster than bzip2 with a little
> better compression. At lower compression levels it seems like it's
> about as fast as gzip while compressing noticeably farther -
On 2/10/2010 10:36 AM, Sean M Clark wrote:
> On 2010Feb10 8:50 AM, Steve Polyack wrote:
>
>> On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
>>
I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
efficient...
>>> Really?
>>>
> [...]
>
On 2010Feb10 8:50 AM, Steve Polyack wrote:
> On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
>>> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
>>> efficient...
>>>
>> Really?
[...]
>> 255526 bytes less while six times slower..
>>
> This is extremely dependent on the co
On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
>> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
>> efficient...
>>
> Really?
>
> $ du -m /tmp/foo.iso
> 625 /tmp/foo.iso
> $ gzip -c/dev/null
> 0+34388 records in
> 0+34388 records out
> 5
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:05:19AM -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote:
>
> (...) gzip or I can use another compress program...
No.
> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
> efficient...
Really?
$ du -m /tmp/foo.iso
625 /tmp/foo.iso
$ gzip -c /dev/null
On 02/10/10 06:05, Gilberto Nunes wrote:
> Hi folks...
>
> I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can
> use another compress program...
>
> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
> efficient...
It is true that bzip2 is more efficient than
On 10.02.2010 / 09:05:19 -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote:
> Hi folks...
>
> I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can
> use another compress program...
>
> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
> efficient...
or even Parallel BZIP2, see htt
Hi folks...
I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can
use another compress program...
I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more
efficient...
Thanks for any help...
Regards
Gilberto Nunes Ferreira
TI
Selbetti Gestão de Documentos
Telefon
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Victor Hugo dos
Santos wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:57 AM, John Drescher wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Victor Hugo dos
>> Santos wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> You are not using the same exact dataset (145GB versus 140GB source
>> data ) in both tests s
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:57 AM, John Drescher wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Victor Hugo dos
> Santos wrote:
[...]
> You are not using the same exact dataset (145GB versus 140GB source
> data ) in both tests so its meaningless that GZIP6 is better than
> GZIP9.
yes.. one report is
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Victor Hugo dos
Santos wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 6:53 PM, John Drescher wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
>> Santiago wrote:
>>> Hey co-workers,
>>>
>>> I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
>>> I am using "compression
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:57 AM, John Drescher wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Victor Hugo dos
> Santos wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 6:53 PM, John Drescher wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
>>> Santiago wrote:
Hey co-workers,
I wonder if it is pos
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Gavin McCullagh wrote:
> Hi,
[...]
> Another useful feature might be a wildcard "excludefromcompression"
> directive so you could say:
>
> excludefromcompression {
> pattern = *.zip
> pattern = *.gz
> pattern = *
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 6:53 PM, John Drescher wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
> Santiago wrote:
>> Hey co-workers,
>>
>> I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
>> I am using "compression = GZIP" but sometimes it compress only 15% of
>> all volume.
>>
>> Note
Thank you, John.
best rds,
Simone
John Drescher escreveu:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
Santiago wrote:
Hey co-workers,
I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
I am using "compression = GZIP" but sometimes it compress only 15% of
all volume.
Note
> On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:54:35 +0100, Gavin McCullagh said:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>
> > > Another useful feature might be a wildcard "excludefromcompression"
> > > directive so you could say:
>
> > > This might avoid wasting time trying to compress the uncc
Hi,
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> Most of the data are compressible ( exchange server storage, and Navision
> Database ) at a 75% rate with gzip2
> we have 78% with gzip6 but it double easyly the time need to obtain it. So
> sometime it doesn't help to try to do big compression.
Gavin McCullagh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>
>> Some time ago, I've made some tests on a customer site.
>> They have plenty data that could be compressed ( a 75% ratio )
>>
>> With GZIP ( which is equal to gzip default level 6 ) we loose hours of
>> compression
Hi,
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> Some time ago, I've made some tests on a customer site.
> They have plenty data that could be compressed ( a 75% ratio )
>
> With GZIP ( which is equal to gzip default level 6 ) we loose hours of
> compression to obtain finally only a 78% ratio
John Drescher wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
> Santiago wrote:
>> Hey co-workers,
>>
>> I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
>> I am using "compression = GZIP" but sometimes it compress only 15% of
>> all volume.
>>
>> Note: My backup is FILE Type.
>>
> Tr
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Simone S.
Santiago wrote:
> Hey co-workers,
>
> I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
> I am using "compression = GZIP" but sometimes it compress only 15% of
> all volume.
>
> Note: My backup is FILE Type.
>
Try:
compression=GZIP9
http://www.b
Hey co-workers,
I wonder if it is possible improve the Bacula compression?
I am using "compression = GZIP" but sometimes it compress only 15% of
all volume.
Note: My backup is FILE Type.
Best Regards,
Simone
--
Enter t
Compression is handled by the FD, so you will find all the related
compression code there. However, you will also need to patch the DIR
and the SD to recognize the new compression. I was looking into this
before, and I probably will again, but the compression code isn't
really simple so adding a ne
Oh yes, it would be nice..
Ok, so you're telling me that I need to patch the code myself in order
to make other compression methods working? The problem is that this
network is composed of SOME HUNDREDS of server with different
distributions (redhat, fedora, debian) so I wish I could found somethin
Diego Roccia wrote:
> Hi all,
> a question: is there a way to implement other compression methods (like
> lzo) in bacula? I found an old patch for bacula 1.3.something are
> there any news about this?
>
> thanks in advance
> Diego
>
>
One thing that should be a big big advantage would be to
I think that LZMA would definitely be a nice addition to bacula (which
is used by the 7z format) to compress the data.
-Michael
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 20
The compression project was abandoned, but in theory it should not be
hard to create. GZIP is OK, but there are better things out there now
like rk, rar and 7z
Diego Roccia wrote:
> Hi all,
> a question: is there a way to implement other compression methods (like
> lzo) in bacula? I found an old p
Hi all,
a question: is there a way to implement other compression methods (like
lzo) in bacula? I found an old patch for bacula 1.3.something are
there any news about this?
thanks in advance
Diego
-
This SF.net email is
Hi everybody,
I got 2 problems with my bacula configuration :
I got 41,xxx,xxx kbytes of data to backup (got this number with estimate
command in bacula console), but when a full backup has finished It take 2 tapes
with 38,xxx,xxx kbytes on one tape and 22,xxx,xxx in the other. I precise
42 matches
Mail list logo
