Kern Sibbald schrieb:
> On Wednesday 07 October 2009 08:47:57 Thomas Mueller wrote:
> > > Well... it's a bit annoying to get a warning mail from bacula just
> > > because of that. And I'm quite sure I haven't seen this is 2.4.4 and
> > > before. I don't see why bacula should warn me about this. Hm.
Thomas Mueller schrieb:
>
> > Well... it's a bit annoying to get a warning mail from bacula just
> > because of that. And I'm quite sure I haven't seen this is 2.4.4 and
> > before. I don't see why bacula should warn me about this. Hm...
>
>
>
> yes it's annoying because you get a warning altou
> Well... it's a bit annoying to get a warning mail from bacula just
> because of that. And I'm quite sure I haven't seen this is 2.4.4 and
> before. I don't see why bacula should warn me about this. Hm...
yes it's annoying because you get a warning altough everything just works
fine. but mayb
> Well... it's a bit annoying to get a warning mail from bacula just
> because of that. And I'm quite sure I haven't seen this is 2.4.4 and
> before. I don't see why bacula should warn me about this. Hm...
yes it's annoying because you get a warning altough everything just works
fine. but mayb
Am 01.10.2009 um 07:27 schrieb Kern Sibbald:
>
> What you seem to be proposing is to ignore those cases (entry in the
> catalog
> and no labeled Volume), which seems to me dangerous. Suppose that
> someone
> deletes one of your disk Volumes, should Bacula just silently ignore
> that?
> Su
Kern Sibbald schrieb:
> On Wednesday 30 September 2009 22:48:43 Ralf Gross wrote:
> > Alex Ehrlich schrieb:
> > > This warning message is the usual result of on-disk volume
> > > *auto*-creation (LabelFormat provided, among others; also Recycle=yes,
> > > AutoPrune=yes, VolumeRetention=smth, Volume
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 09:34:44PM +0200, Ralf Gross wrote:
> Well... it's a bit annoying to get a warning mail from bacula just
> because of that. And I'm quite sure I haven't seen this is 2.4.4 and
> before. I don't see why bacula should warn me about this. Hm...
I have also been seeing this sin
On Thursday 01 October 2009 00:13:59 Carsten Menke wrote:
> Am 30.09.2009 um 22:18 schrieb Kern Sibbald:
> > Did you create the Volume in the catalog with a bconsole "add"
> > command?
> >
> > If that is the case, then it is sure you will get the error message
> > -- after
> > all when there is a V
Am 30.09.2009 um 22:18 schrieb Kern Sibbald:
>
> Did you create the Volume in the catalog with a bconsole "add"
> command?
>
> If that is the case, then it is sure you will get the error message
> -- after
> all when there is a Volume record in the database, it *should* exist
> on disk.
> I
This warning message is the usual result of on-disk volume
*auto*-creation (LabelFormat provided, among others; also Recycle=yes,
AutoPrune=yes, VolumeRetention=smth, VolumeUseDuration=smth). I do
experience the same behaviour since upgrading from 2.4 to 3.0.
Alex Ehrlich
Kern Sibbald wrote:
>
Alex Ehrlich schrieb:
> This warning message is the usual result of on-disk volume
> *auto*-creation (LabelFormat provided, among others; also Recycle=yes,
> AutoPrune=yes, VolumeRetention=smth, VolumeUseDuration=smth). I do
> experience the same behaviour since upgrading from 2.4 to 3.0.
Ok, I
Kern Sibbald schrieb:
> On Wednesday 30 September 2009 21:34:44 Ralf Gross wrote:
> > Thomas Mueller schrieb:
> > > > I can't remember seen this warning befor upgrading to 3.0.x. Shouldn't
> > > > bacula first label the volume and then check if it "exists"? I don't
> > > > see a reason for this war
On Wednesday 30 September 2009 21:34:44 Ralf Gross wrote:
> Thomas Mueller schrieb:
> > > I can't remember seen this warning befor upgrading to 3.0.x. Shouldn't
> > > bacula first label the volume and then check if it "exists"? I don't
> > > see a reason for this warning message.
> >
> > bug #1254
Thomas Mueller schrieb:
>
> >
> >
> > I can't remember seen this warning befor upgrading to 3.0.x. Shouldn't
> > bacula first label the volume and then check if it "exists"? I don't see
> > a reason for this warning message.
> >
>
> bug #1254 (http://bugs.bacula.org/view.php?id=1254)
>
> "In
>
>
> I can't remember seen this warning befor upgrading to 3.0.x. Shouldn't
> bacula first label the volume and then check if it "exists"? I don't see
> a reason for this warning message.
>
bug #1254 (http://bugs.bacula.org/view.php?id=1254)
"In any case, even if you are using automatic labe
Hi,
I've recently upgraded from 2.4.4 to 3.0.2. Since then I regularly get warnings
about newly created volumes where the DB record exists but the disk volume was
not created/labled yet.
30-Sep 12:06 VUMEM004-sd JobId 15915: User defined maximum volume capacity
5,000,000,000 exceeded on device "
16 matches
Mail list logo
