Hello Joseph, There is no surprise in that finding. If it is not in the catalog, it doesn't exist. IMHO Bacula default File and Job values should be much higher, e.g. 5 years or unlimited. If the user have special machines with millions of files, he should lower the File Retention accordingly. This is the exception use case scenario.
Regards, -- MSc Heitor Faria (Miami/USA) CEO Bacula LatAm mobile1: + 1 909 655-8971 mobile2: + 55 61 98268-4220 América Latina [ http://bacula.lat/] -------- Original Message -------- From: Joseph Zatarski <joe.zatar...@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2021 04:27 PM To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] noticing an occasional incremental backup act like full >Hello again everyone, > >I've figured out what is happening to cause this issue. > >Long story short, bacula pruned the file records from my last full >backup job out of the catalog. It didn't prune the job itself, just the >file records. This causes any file that hadn't been backed up since my >initial full backup job to be considered as a new file to bacula when it >does the incremental. Since most of my files don't change very often, >that explains the behavior entirely. > >There's plenty of warnings in the documentation about trying to restore >from jobs that have had their file records pruned, but nothing about >trying to do an incremental on top of a full that had it's files pruned. >Obviously thinking about this a little bit would reveal that it's an issue. > >Best Regards, >Joe Zatarski > > >_______________________________________________ >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
