Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management - catalogdisk discrepencies
I've been having a lot of problems with Bacula's disk volume management over time. Most issues seem to stem from cases where the catalog gets out of sync with the file system, like: - Volume inserted into catalog, creation of file on disk fails, volume remains in catalog - Write to volume fails, resulting in volume that's shorter on disk than the catalog thinks it should be because the catalog is updated with the *expected* size assuming the write is successful. Further backups try to use this volume and fail. Restores from this volume fail. ARgh! If the disk/array was full the bacula volume should have been marked full when no space is left on the device. After the volume is marked full then it should not have been used for additional backups. The latest issue is another catalogdisk discrepency. At some point Bacula seems to have failed to create some auto-labeled volumes, but has still inserted them into the catalog. This might've been due to a transient disk-full situation, but it's truly hard to know. You need to prevent the disk from filling up completely. Also is your database on the same filesystem as your disk volumes? This could cause serious problems in a disk full situation. John -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management - catalogdisk discrepencies
On 18/05/2010 6:19 PM, John Drescher wrote: On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote: Hi folks I've been having a lot of problems with Bacula's disk volume management over time. Most issues seem to stem from cases where the catalog gets out of sync with the file system, like: - Volume inserted into catalog, creation of file on disk fails, volume remains in catalog - Write to volume fails, resulting in volume that's shorter on disk than the catalog thinks it should be because the catalog is updated with the *expected* size assuming the write is successful. Further backups try to use this volume and fail. Restores from this volume fail. ARgh! If the disk/array was full the bacula volume should have been marked full when no space is left on the device. After the volume is marked full then it should not have been used for additional backups. That doesn't help much, since it's the storage device that's full not that volume. Attempting to allocate a new volume on the same storage will fail because the previous one used up all the space. This fails, and Bacula merrily tries to make another one You need to prevent the disk from filling up completely. Ha! That'd be nice. I only have 8TB to play with, and I'm not in complete control of how users work with the storage being backed up. In general, I can prevent disk-full, and of course Bacula can't be expected to continue happily if the disk does fill up for some reason. My issue is that it doesn't fail in any graceful or sensible way. In any case, usually disk full here means a particular logical volume for a subset of my backups filled up. I isolate different backup sets so that the failure of one doesn't affect others. Also is your database on the same filesystem as your disk volumes? This could cause serious problems in a disk full situation. No, it isn't. Each Storage device gets its own dedicated logical volume to hold volumes from that backup set. The database has its own logical volume, as does the root fs (including var and so on). -- Craig Ringer -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] Disk volume management - catalogdisk discrepencies
Hi folks I've been having a lot of problems with Bacula's disk volume management over time. Most issues seem to stem from cases where the catalog gets out of sync with the file system, like: - Volume inserted into catalog, creation of file on disk fails, volume remains in catalog - Write to volume fails, resulting in volume that's shorter on disk than the catalog thinks it should be because the catalog is updated with the *expected* size assuming the write is successful. Further backups try to use this volume and fail. Restores from this volume fail. ARgh! The latest issue is another catalogdisk discrepency. At some point Bacula seems to have failed to create some auto-labeled volumes, but has still inserted them into the catalog. This might've been due to a transient disk-full situation, but it's truly hard to know. The catalog shows some volumes that don't actually exist on disk: +-++---+-+---+--+--+-+--+---++-+ | mediaid | volumename | volstatus | enabled | volbytes | volfiles | volretention | recycle | slot | inchanger | mediatype | lastwritten | +-++---+-+---+--+--+-+--+---++-+ | 158 | HotProductionIncr-0158 | Recycle | 1 | 1 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-21 17:46:51 | | 165 | HotProductionIncr-0165 | Used | 1 | 2,129,594,337 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-22 14:00:22 | | 172 | HotProductionIncr-0172 | Used | 1 | 486,771,914 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-23 13:00:31 | | 178 | HotProductionIncr-0178 | Used | 1 | 2,698,541 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-24 13:00:19 | | 186 | HotProductionIncr-0186 | Used | 1 | 622,259 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-24 23:05:16 | | 196 | HotProductionIncr-0196 | Used | 1 | 1,240,182 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-26 23:05:09 | | 202 | HotProductionIncr-0202 | Used | 1 | 1,634,621,778 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-28 13:00:21 | | 203 | HotProductionIncr-0203 | Used | 1 | 3,037,665,985 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-29 14:00:23 | | 204 | HotProductionIncr-0204 | Used | 1 | 695,723,567 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-04-30 13:00:55 | | 205 | HotProductionIncr-0205 | Used | 1 | 8,473,730,759 | 1 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-06 14:01:11 | | 206 | HotProductionIncr-0206 | Used | 1 | 4,679,398,060 | 1 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-07 13:00:55 | | 207 | HotProductionIncr-0207 | Used | 1 | 107,414,349 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-08 23:05:05 | | 208 | HotProductionIncr-0208 | Used | 1 | 519,455 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-08 23:05:48 | | 209 | HotProductionIncr-0209 | Used | 1 | 711,016,317 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-10 23:06:23 | | 210 | HotProductionIncr-0210 | Used | 1 | 1,723,979,638 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-12 10:01:34 | | 211 | HotProductionIncr-0211 | Used | 1 | 5,953,774,081 | 1 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | 2010-05-13 12:02:58 | | 212 | HotProductionIncr-0212 | Append| 1 | 0 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | | | 213 | HotProductionIncr-0213 | Append| 1 | 0 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | | | 214 | HotProductionIncr-0214 | Append| 1 | 0 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | | | 215 | HotProductionIncr-0215 | Append| 1 | 0 | 0 |1,209,600 | 1 |0 | 0 | File_HotProduction | | |
[Bacula-users] Disk volume management.
I am playing with disk volumes right now. I have a full pool set up to create volumes with 4G maximum volume size. I could set up a full pool that everything is written to, or I could set up a full pool per client, or set up a full pool based on some other criteria. Unless I would have some difference in retention times, I cannot come up with a reason to not put everything in one full pool, and let Bacula handle all the files. Thoughts? -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management.
A similar issue I was recently thinking about. In the end it came down to wanting to be able to run multiple concurrent backup jobs and a single pool would result in all but 1 job waiting for the storage device to be available. see: http://bacula.org/en/dev-manual/Basic_Volume_Management.html#SECTION00262 On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Brian Debelius bdebel...@intelesyscorp.com wrote: I am playing with disk volumes right now. I have a full pool set up to create volumes with 4G maximum volume size. I could set up a full pool that everything is written to, or I could set up a full pool per client, or set up a full pool based on some other criteria. Unless I would have some difference in retention times, I cannot come up with a reason to not put everything in one full pool, and let Bacula handle all the files. Thoughts? -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management.
I am playing with disk volumes right now. I have a full pool set up to create volumes with 4G maximum volume size. I could set up a full pool that everything is written to, or I could set up a full pool per client, or set up a full pool based on some other criteria. Unless I would have some difference in retention times, I cannot come up with a reason to not put everything in one full pool, and let Bacula handle all the files. Thoughts? Good choice on the 4GB. This will allow you to put old volumes on DVD if you want and remove some temporarily. Also you will not notice a difference in performance between using many 4GB volumes versus few 100GB volumes. A lot of users go for the bigger volumes but then it hurts recycling and it also hurts moving files around. I can say that rsync to a remote server will be better with 4GB volumes versus 100GB. John -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management.
The manual say you can concurrently write. In my testing this week, I have been concurrently writing to the same pool and volume. You can, in fact, run multiple concurrent jobs using the Storage definition given with this example, and all the jobs will simultaneously write into the Volume that is being written. Todd Rowe wrote: A similar issue I was recently thinking about. In the end it came down to wanting to be able to run multiple concurrent backup jobs and a single pool would result in all but 1 job waiting for the storage device to be available. see: http://bacula.org/en/dev-manual/Basic_Volume_Management.html#SECTION00262 On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Brian Debelius bdebel...@intelesyscorp.com mailto:bdebel...@intelesyscorp.com wrote: I am playing with disk volumes right now. I have a full pool set up to create volumes with 4G maximum volume size. I could set up a full pool that everything is written to, or I could set up a full pool per client, or set up a full pool based on some other criteria. Unless I would have some difference in retention times, I cannot come up with a reason to not put everything in one full pool, and let Bacula handle all the files. Thoughts? -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Disk volume management.
A similar issue I was recently thinking about. In the end it came down to wanting to be able to run multiple concurrent backup jobs and a single pool would result in all but 1 job waiting for the storage device to be available. I am confused at this statement. I mean if you put all volumes in the same pool and run concurrent jobs with each job writing to that same pool the allowed # of jobs you specified will run concurrently. If you put them in different pools then only 1 job will execute per storage device. John -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
