[Bacula-users] Fwd: bacula possibly confused about label
-- Forwarded message -- From: Chris Ord Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:10 PM Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] bacula possibly confused about label To: John Drescher John, that is the confusing part(see bold) Device "Drive_0" (/dev/nst0) open but no Bacula volume is currently mounted. Device is BLOCKED waiting for mount of volume "VARCD003", <-waiting for tape Pool:ArcD Media type: LTO5 Slot 4 is loaded in drive 0. <- It's telling me it's loaded I know the write protect is not on as the tape was written to previously on the last archive run. I know bacula 'knows' about the tape because it was used previously about a month ago. Anyway as I have labelled all devices upto about VARCD007 I would expect bacula at the very least to a) offer to label the tape because the barcode calls it VARCD003. b) tell me which tape is in fact loaded. Confusing to say the least. I suppose really is there a way to tell bacula that this is in fact the correct tape and carry on? Cheers Chris On 07/09/2012, at 12:53 PM, John Drescher wrote: sorry I should have been a bit more specific, the tape is mounted, both bacula and mtx thinks it's mounted. Bacula doesn't think the tape is a bacula archive(it is). I am not sure about bacula thinking the volume is mounted when the sd says it is not mounted however could the write protect be on? John *Chris Ord | I.T. Manager* email chris@digitalpictures.com.au switch +61 2 9439 5922 fax +61 2 9436 3554 Digital Pictures This communication is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the named recipient, please contact us immediately. You must not copy, use or disclose this communication, or any attachments or information in it, without our prior consent. -- John M. Drescher -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Fwd: bacula possibly confused about label
On 9/7/12 7:51 AM, "John Drescher" wrote: >-- Forwarded message -- >From: Chris Ord >Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:10 PM >Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] bacula possibly confused about label >To: John Drescher > > >John, >that is the confusing part(see bold) > >Device "Drive_0" (/dev/nst0) open but no Bacula volume is currently >mounted. >Device is BLOCKED waiting for mount of volume "VARCD003", <-waiting >for tape > Pool:ArcD > Media type: LTO5 >Slot 4 is loaded in drive 0. <- It's telling me it's loaded >I know the write protect is not on as the tape was written to >previously on the last archive run. >I know bacula 'knows' about the tape because it was used previously >about a month ago. > >Anyway as I have labelled all devices upto about VARCD007 I would >expect bacula at the very least to >a) offer to label the tape because the barcode calls it VARCD003. >b) tell me which tape is in fact loaded. >Confusing to say the least. > >I suppose really is there a way to tell bacula that this is in fact >the correct tape and carry on? > >Cheers >Chris >On 07/09/2012, at 12:53 PM, John Drescher wrote: > >sorry I should have been a bit more specific, > >the tape is mounted, both bacula and mtx thinks it's mounted. Bacula >doesn't think the tape is a bacula archive(it is). > > > >I am not sure about bacula thinking the volume is mounted when the sd >says it is not mounted however could the write protect be on? > >John > > >*Chris Ord | I.T. Manager* >email chris@digitalpictures.com.au > >switch +61 2 9439 5922 >fax +61 2 9436 3554 > >Digital Pictures > >This communication is confidential and may contain legally privileged >information. If you are >not the named recipient, please contact us immediately. You must not >copy, use or disclose >this communication, or any attachments or information in it, without our >prior consent. > >-- >John M. Drescher The key info here is the "BLOCKED" on the drive. The tape may be there, but bacula cannot complete the mount operation. I've had similar situations. Within bconsole or bat, work with the unmount, release, and mount commands. It may take a couple of passes to get that "BLOCKED" removed. Patti Clark Information International Associates, Inc. Linux Administrator and subcontractor to: Research and Development Systems Support Oak Ridge National Laboratory -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Fwd: bacula possibly confused about label
> The key info here is the "BLOCKED" on the drive. The tape may be there, > but bacula cannot complete the mount operation. I've had similar > situations. Within bconsole or bat, work with the unmount, release, and > mount commands. It may take a couple of passes to get that "BLOCKED" > removed. > I also have seen this in the past that is why I suggested issuing the mount command in bacula. Also looking at the bacula log or the messages can be very helpful to understand why bacula does not want to use a volume. John -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Fwd: bacula possibly confused about label
> Specifically the tape will probably have been removed without being rewound > first. > We use our tape robots for a variety of functions, ingesting data from > clients, backups and archive cycles. This just has never come up before. > I am confused. You can not remove an LTO tape without rewinding. The reason is LTO technology is a single reel on the tape and single reel on the drive. If you removed the tape without rewinding the tape would have been destroyed. John -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
