[Bacula-users] restore - Volume not in Recource
Hi, I have in my backup problem: lack of space I put my monthly volumes on another computer. Now I want to do a restore, I copied the relevant month volumes back into the system and a Bacula restore command. He seems, however, the monthly volumes hard to find. have user, group and file permissions ok.I found nothing in the documentation, I turn to this list. Sorry for my bad English :-( Bacula 2.4.2 restore: cwd is: / $ cd data cwd is: /data/ $ mark vg 123,465 files marked. $ done Storage "" not found, using Storage "File" from MediaType "File". Bootstrap records written to /var/lib/bacula/working/bacula-dir.restore.1.bsr The job will require the following Volume(s) Storage(s)SD Device(s) === Monthly-5216 Monthly-5217 Monthly-5218 Monthly-5219 Monthly-5220 Monthly-5221 Monthly-5222 Weekly-0080 File FileStorage Weekly-0001 File FileStorage Daily-0039File FileStorage -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] tape size & speed LTO-1 drive
Arno Lehmann schrieb: > ... > > Looks all very good. > > I would try dd'ing some random data to tape next. > > Running sar or, at least, vmstat and top during testing and a slow > backup might reveal some unexpected bottlenecks. > > Also, it's important to see where the backups are slow - for example, > the actual data transfer can be fast, and the catalog operations slow. > You can see some of that in the job report mail. (That wouldn't be too > uncommon, as catalog operations can vary in speed quite a lot, > depending on which database you use, and how that database is tuned.) Hello Arno, I has news. My problems are not possibly to be searched with bacula. I receive similar values also with other "block size". It, however, is still unclear to me where the cause can lie. Blind to company? Storage is quick enough. bacula:/data # dd if=/data/testfile_urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=10 1+0 Datensätze ein 1+0 Datensätze aus 1048576 Bytes (10 GB) kopiert, 55,5439 s, 189 MB/s vmstat procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- cpu r b swpd free buff cache si sobibo in cs us sy id wa 2 0 2252924 122632 4780 384252800 18117250 1942 3412 0 9 73 18 1 0 2252924 123600 4944 384113600 17809210 1921 3361 0 9 76 15 2 0 2252924 121876 5120 384271200 180784 0 1878 3376 0 9 75 16 1 1 2252924 120496 5292 384395600 16733212 1757 3170 0 9 76 16 0 1 2252924 122408 5464 384169600 177324 0 1856 3385 0 8 74 17 0 1 2252924 122568 5640 384160800 180016 0 1900 3338 0 10 74 16 0 1 2252924 121100 5820 384270000 180660 8 1909 3384 0 10 72 18 0 1 2252924 121620 5996 384192400 178608 0 1891 3375 0 10 74 16 - Here the problem bacula:/data # dd if=/data/testfile_urandom of=/dev/nst0 bs=1M count=1000 1000+0 Datensätze ein 1000+0 Datensätze aus 1048576000 Bytes (1,0 GB) kopiert, 185,538 s, 5,7 MB/s vmstat: procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- cpu r b swpd free buff cache si sobibo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 2252924 121308 8640 383978400 6148 0 153 205 0 0 99 1 0 0 2252924 121208 8652 383992400 512412 131 218 0 1 98 2 0 0 2252924 120144 8660 384102800 6152 0 128 176 0 0 99 1 0 0 2252924 121096 8664 383984400 5124 8 172 206 0 2 97 1 0 0 2252924 121136 8668 383992400 5124 0 116 164 0 1 98 1 0 0 2252924 121140 8676 383998800 512812 150 173 0 1 98 1 0 0 2252924 124000 8688 383705600 717248 233 282 0 1 96 3 0 0 2252924 123852 8704 383715200 512852 214 258 0 1 97 3 - Can it be I should search the mistake with the controller SCSI? I use an Adaptec 29160 controllers with the standard settings. scsi 0:0:4:0: Sequential-Access HP Ultrium 1-SCSI E32U PQ: 0 ANSI: 3 scsi target0:0:4: Beginning Domain Validation scsi target0:0:4: wide asynchronous scsi target0:0:4: FAST-40 WIDE SCSI 80.0 MB/s ST (25 ns, offset 15) scsi target0:0:4: Domain Validation skipping write tests scsi target0:0:4: Ending Domain Validation Do you have one more idea? Jens -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] tape size & speed LTO-1 drive
Arno Lehmann schrieb: > Hello, > > and welcome! > > 30.11.2009 13:21, Jens Froehlich wrote: >> Hi bacula-users, >> >> I has a problem with my Bacula (3.0.2) installation on OpenSuSE 11.1 >> (32Bit). The LTO-1 tapes are described only a half, nevertheless, it >> should fit 100 GB on it? > > Depending on the data, yes. Usually, with compression enabled, you'd > get more than 100G on each tape. > >> I already succeed different values of the >> parametres " minimum block size" and "maximum blocksize" tested, >> unfortunately. If I the tapes with tar describe I reach 100 GB. I also >> find the writing speed with 6 MB/S a little bit slow? > > Have you run the btape 'test' procedure? > > Do you see any SCSI-related messages in the system's log file? > > And yes, 6MB/s is rather slow for LTO-1, but the bottleneck could be > elsewhere. > > To get good speed, you need to do a bit of performance tuning, but > let's see the answers for the above questions first :-) > > By the way - I believe Kern will mention performance tuning on his > upcoming webinar. A link to regsiter is at > http://www.baculasystems.com/eng I don't know what he'll present in > detail, though... > > Cheers, > > Arno > - I used new Sony data cardriges with 100/200 GB - the drive hardwarecompression ist on - no SCSI errors are to be seen in the log files - test under Ubuntu 9.10 (server) with bacula 2.2.4 brought the same results - I have done different tests for the analysis. - Basically everything seems to be, nevertheless, in order? Tape Drive - test with the HP Test tool - Device Performance Test Started on Drive (Ultrium 1-SCSI) (0.4.0[0-/dev/sg0]) - Opening Tape Drive 0.4.0[0-/dev/sg0] - Successfully opened the Tape Drive /dev/nst0 - 2147 MB written in 33.6762 seconds at 63.7687 MB/s hdparm (Hardware RAID5 with SATA Drives) /dev/sdc1: Timing cached reads: 1234 MB in 2.00 seconds = 616.73 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 512 MB in 3.01 seconds = 170.11 MB/sec - the backup reads only from sdc1 (5-10 Gb Files) write Test with dd dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/nst0 bs=1M count=1000 1000+0 Datensätze ein 1000+0 Datensätze aus 1048576000 Bytes (1,0 GB) kopiert, 16,3772 s, 64,0 MB/s btape *test === Write, rewind, and re-read test === I'm going to write 1000 records and an EOF then write 1000 records and an EOF, then rewind, and re-read the data to verify that it is correct. This is an *essential* feature ... btape: btape.c:841 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:857 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:866 Rewind OK. 1000 blocks re-read correctly. Got EOF on tape. 1000 blocks re-read correctly. === Test Succeeded. End Write, rewind, and re-read test === === Write, rewind, and position test === I'm going to write 1000 records and an EOF then write 1000 records and an EOF, then rewind, and position to a few blocks and verify that it is correct. This is an *essential* feature ... btape: btape.c:953 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:969 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:978 Rewind OK. Reposition to file:block 0:4 Block 5 re-read correctly. Reposition to file:block 0:200 Block 201 re-read correctly. Reposition to file:block 0:999 Block 1000 re-read correctly. Reposition to file:block 1:0 Block 1001 re-read correctly. Reposition to file:block 1:600 Block 1601 re-read correctly. Reposition to file:block 1:999 Block 2000 re-read correctly. === Test Succeeded. End Write, rewind, and re-read test === === Append files test === This test is essential to Bacula. I'm going to write one record in file 0, two records in file 1, and three records in file 2 btape: btape.c:485 Rewound "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:1587 Wrote one record of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:1589 Wrote block to device. btape: btape.c:515 Wrote 1 EOF to "LTO-1" (/dev/st0) btape:
Re: [Bacula-users] tape size & speed LTO-1 drive
John Drescher schrieb: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Jens Froehlich > wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi bacula-users, >> >> I has a problem with my Bacula (3.0.2) installation on OpenSuSE 11.1 >> (32Bit). The LTO-1 tapes are described only a half, nevertheless, it >> should fit 100 GB on it? I already succeed different values of the >> parametres " minimum block size" and "maximum blocksize" tested, >> unfortunately. If I the tapes with tar describe I reach 100 GB. I also >> find the writing speed with 6 MB/S a little bit slow? >> >> - -- >> Pool: DailyTAPE >> >> DailyTAPE-0001 | Full | 1 | 54,780,100,608 |1 | >> 518,400 | 1 |1 | 1 | LTO-1 >> >> DailyTAPE-0002 | Full | 1 | 53,212,479,488 |1 | >> 518,400 | 1 |2 | 1 | LTO-1 >> >> . >> >> DailyTAPE-0010 | Append| 1 |131,072 |0 | >> 518,400 | 1 |10 | 1 | LTO-1 >> - -- >> >> What must I do, the Bacula the tapes with at least 90 - 95 GB describes? >> Can somebody help me here? >> > > Check for scsi errors in your dmesg. > > John > I can find here no mistakes bacula:~ # dmesg | grep scsi scsi0 : Adaptec AIC7XXX EISA/VLB/PCI SCSI HBA DRIVER, Rev 7.0 scsi 0:0:4:0: Sequential-Access HP Ultrium 1-SCSI E32U PQ: 0 ANSI: 3 scsi target0:0:4: Beginning Domain Validation scsi target0:0:4: wide asynchronous scsi target0:0:4: FAST-40 WIDE SCSI 80.0 MB/s ST (25 ns, offset 15) scsi target0:0:4: Domain Validation skipping write tests scsi target0:0:4: Ending Domain Validation scsi 0:0:6:0: Medium Changer OVERLAND LXB 0101 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 scsi target0:0:6: Beginning Domain Validation scsi target0:0:6: wide asynchronous scsi target0:0:6: FAST-10 WIDE SCSI 20.0 MB/s ST (100 ns, offset 15) scsi target0:0:6: Domain Validation skipping write tests scsi target0:0:6: Ending Domain Validation scsi target0:0:6: FAST-10 WIDE SCSI 20.0 MB/s ST (100 ns, offset 15) Also "warn" and "messages" are negative. Jens -- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] tape size & speed LTO-1 drive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi bacula-users, I has a problem with my Bacula (3.0.2) installation on OpenSuSE 11.1 (32Bit). The LTO-1 tapes are described only a half, nevertheless, it should fit 100 GB on it? I already succeed different values of the parametres " minimum block size" and "maximum blocksize" tested, unfortunately. If I the tapes with tar describe I reach 100 GB. I also find the writing speed with 6 MB/S a little bit slow? - -- Pool: DailyTAPE DailyTAPE-0001 | Full | 1 | 54,780,100,608 |1 | 518,400 | 1 |1 | 1 | LTO-1 DailyTAPE-0002 | Full | 1 | 53,212,479,488 |1 | 518,400 | 1 |2 | 1 | LTO-1 . DailyTAPE-0010 | Append| 1 |131,072 |0 | 518,400 | 1 |10 | 1 | LTO-1 - -- What must I do, the Bacula the tapes with at least 90 - 95 GB describes? Can somebody help me here? By Jens Sorry for my bad English :-( -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAksTuM4ACgkQ8ZcA+K8jdeTELgCg1dozNtjKZT0Mko5SjrW4i3kg WToAoL1u9bUFpCc1EDIdFJFwdEKq/Wk+ =wj5A -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
