On Feb 5, 2008, at 8:58 PM, Martin Simmons wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 12:52:06 -0500, Ben Hyde said:
>>
>> I have Bacula installed[1] and running, thanks.
>>
>> That installation gave me some sample configuration files. I got to
>> writing up my notes as kind of self audit of my install and ...
>>
>> I'm so confused! I assume that if the same resource is described in
>> two configuration files, and they both provide a name for that
>> resource that name should be identical. Otherwise, at minimum, the
>> reports created using bconsole are going to get confusing.
>>
>> But the storage daemon's resource, in the examples I got when I
>> installed, don't follow that rule. In the director deamon's
>> configuration file it's named "File" (sic), while in the storage
>> deamon's configuration file it's called "elm-sd."
>>
>> Presumably there isn't any code to check that the names match.
>>
>> That's my question? Should names attributes, if given, for a given
>> resource be identical across configuration files? Or is it a must?
>>
>> In a related matter this text appears in the bacula-sd.conf.sample
>> file:
>>
>> ...
>> #
>> # Devices supported by this Storage Daemon
>> # To connect, the Directiors'bacula-dir.conf must have the
>> # same Name and MediaType
>> #
>>
>> Device {
>> Name = FileStorage
>> Media Type = File
>> ...
>>
>> Which leads one to think that the storage daemon on the director side
>> should be named after the device name. Which seems wrong.
>>
>> Like I said I have it all working, and at this point I've changed the
>> director's config file to get rid of the storage resource called
>> "File". I changed it to the name used in the storage daemon's config
>> file - since that's what feels correct to me. If somebody can point
>> out where these sample configuration files are in the svn browser I'd
>> can provide put together some patches.
>
> The director's configuration references the names of the storage
> daemon's
> devices, not the daemon itself. This is because a storage daemon
> can have
> several devices.
Thanks. So, I think, in-spite of the two resources have the same
resource type
i.e. "storage {...}" they are actually describing different things;
one's describing
the storage daemon, the other is describing how an acces path to a
storage device.
I'll assume that's a historical legacy, where those two things were
more similar
than they are now. A possible fix would be to change the storage
{...} to
storageDeamon { ... } in the storage daemon's configuration file.
> The name of the storage daemon is not used outside that
> daemon's configuration file.
While it only appears in that file, it appears not to be used at all
anywhere.
> __Martin
Thanks for helping to clarify what is my confusion v.s. what is just
inherently
confusing.
- ben
ps '#1=(#1#)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
