Re: [Bacula-users] Distributed Bacula daemons

[Josh Fisher]

On 12/21/21 07:19, Heitor Faria wrote:

Hello Yateen,

We need to host bacula-dir, bacula-sd and PostgreSQL on different
servers, what is an efficient architecture amongst the two options
given below:

 1. Hosting bacula-dir and PostgreSQL together on one host,
bacula-sd on another host
 2. Hosting bacula-dir on one host, bacula-sd and PostgreSQL
together on another host

IMHO one should only spam machines if required by the sizing 
(https://www.bacula.lat/bacula-sizing/?lang=en), or for network 
optimization (e.g. a SD closer to the FDs in a remote network). A SD 
is sufficient to backup about 400 machines.
Other than that you will use more resources and have a larger surface 
of possible vulnrerabilities (the oposite of the hardening technique). 
But again, it is just my opinion.
If you still need to make this splti I would go for option "A. Hosting 
bacula-dir and PostgreSQL together on one host, bacula-sd on another 
host", because it will be more pratical to manage the database 
creation and configuration, one less network service and a little bit 
safer. Director and DB also require different types of machines resources.



I question why there would ever be a reason to put the catalog DB on a 
different host that bacula-dir. The sizing document linked to suggests 1 
bacula-dir+DB server host for up to 5,000 machines. Also, if you use 
debs / rpms, then database updates are automated at upgrade time. 
Splitting the catalog DB from bacula-dir is extra work and extra 
(considerable) network traffic for no gain (that I can think of).




Thanks,

Regards,

Yateen Bhagat

--

MSc Heitor Faria (Miami/USA)
Bacula LATAM CIO
mobile1: + 1 909 655-8971
mobile2: + 55 61 98268-4220
linkedin icon 


logo 
América Latina
bacula.lat  | bacula.com.br 




___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Verify jobs and "Warning: sql_get.c:186 More than one Filename!"

[Phil Stracchino]

On 12/21/21 04:25, Mark Dixon wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, Phil Stracchino wrote:
...

I've been running my Bacula jobs in parallel for literally decades now
and have never seen it result in a duplicate Path or Filename warning.
And they ARE only warnings.

I would not worry about it as long as it is only a warning.  You could
manually clean up the duplicates, but it is probably not worth your while.

When did you last run a dbcheck?  The dbcheck tool should clean up most
orphaned and duplicate records.


Hi Phil,

Great, I'd rummaged around the create/update table scripts in etc, but
hadn't spotted dbcheck - thanks for that. Alternatively, I might just
comment-out the warning in the source.


You really should be running dbcheck on a regular basis.  Weekly is a 
good idea.  It's also a good idea to stop the Director while dbcheck 
runs.  That is easy to automate as long as it is not constantly busy.



--
  Phil Stracchino
  Babylon Communications
  ph...@caerllewys.net
  p...@co.ordinate.org
  Landline: +1.603.293.8485
  Mobile:   +1.603.998.6958


___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Distributed Bacula daemons

[Heitor Faria]

Hello Yateen, 

> We need to host bacula-dir, bacula-sd and PostgreSQL on different servers, 
> what
> is an efficient architecture amongst the two options given below:

>1. Hosting bacula-dir and PostgreSQL together on one host, bacula-sd on 
> another
> host
>2. Hosting bacula-dir on one host, bacula-sd and PostgreSQL together on 
> another
> host

IMHO one should only spam machines if required by the sizing 
(https://www.bacula.lat/bacula-sizing/?lang=en), or for network optimization 
(e.g. a SD closer to the FDs in a remote network). A SD is sufficient to backup 
about 400 machines. 
Other than that you will use more resources and have a larger surface of 
possible vulnrerabilities (the oposite of the hardening technique). But again, 
it is just my opinion. 
If you still need to make this splti I would go for option "A. Hosting 
bacula-dir and PostgreSQL together on one host, bacula-sd on another host", 
because it will be more pratical to manage the database creation and 
configuration, one less network service and a little bit safer. Director and DB 
also require different types of machines resources. 

> Thanks,

Regards, 

> Yateen Bhagat

-- 

MSc Heitor Faria (Miami/USA) 
Bacula LATAM CIO 

mobile1: + 1 909 655-8971 
mobile2: + 55 61 98268-4220 
[ https://www.linkedin.com/in/msc-heitor-faria-5ba51b3 ] 
[ http://www.bacula.com.br/ ] 

América Latina 
[ http://bacula.lat/ | bacula.lat ] | [ http://www.bacula.com.br/ | 
bacula.com.br ] 
___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Verify jobs and "Warning: sql_get.c:186 More than one Filename!"

[Mark Dixon]

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, Phil Stracchino wrote:
...

I've been running my Bacula jobs in parallel for literally decades now
and have never seen it result in a duplicate Path or Filename warning.
And they ARE only warnings.

I would not worry about it as long as it is only a warning.  You could
manually clean up the duplicates, but it is probably not worth your while.

When did you last run a dbcheck?  The dbcheck tool should clean up most
orphaned and duplicate records.


Hi Phil,

Great, I'd rummaged around the create/update table scripts in etc, but 
hadn't spotted dbcheck - thanks for that. Alternatively, I might just 
comment-out the warning in the source.


This does seem to be hit when running verify inits in parallel on multiple 
almost-identically-configured hosts at the same time. I really must update 
to a more recent version.


Cheers,

Mark


___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users