Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Saturday 25 February 2006 20:08, Phil Stracchino wrote:
>
>>I don't recall ... does Bacula optimize the BSR files at run time? This
>>one seems remarkably poorly optimized.
>
>
> Bacula processes all records for each volume in a logical order (i.e. in the
> order it expects them to be found on the Volume), it then proceeds with the
> next Volume.
>
> In the case presented below, I suspect that this is the result of a number of
> backup operations where Bacula wrote the Full backup, then the Diff and Inc
> backups (if any) were appended. This leads to an unoptimized bsr where all
> files in the backup will be restored, then the same file in an Diff and Inc
> that is backed up will overlay the first file (inefficient, but it gives the
> right results).
>
> In this case, I *think* that Bacula will process all records for the VXA-0008
> Volume before proceeding to the LTO-0001 Volume. Of course, since this file
> was written by version 1.36 software, Bacula will not be able to switch
> drives ...
Actually, it ought to start with the LTO volume, I'd assume, since
that's the Full backup. This is the first time I've seen it not do so.
--
Phil Stracchino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Renaissance Man, Unix generalist, Perl hacker
Mobile: 603-216-7037 Landline: 603-886-3518
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
