On 03/22 01:31 , Les Mikesell wrote:
> > How do you get a bandwidth availability metric? Short of trying to push
> > data back and forth, you can't.
>
> Most people would enter a fixed number for what they want backuppc to
> consume. Even if you can test it, you don't know if it will stay the
>
On 3/22/2011 12:24 PM, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 13:09 -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
>> I think it would still be helpful to have a hook that would allow some
>> type of query of bandwidth available. Perhaps most users would never
>> use the hook but having the option to ca
Tyler J. Wagner wrote at about 17:24:29 + on Tuesday, March 22, 2011:
> On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 13:09 -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> > I think it would still be helpful to have a hook that would allow some
> > type of query of bandwidth available. Perhaps most users would never
> > use t
On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 13:09 -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> I think it would still be helpful to have a hook that would allow some
> type of query of bandwidth available. Perhaps most users would never
> use the hook but having the option to call an external routine and
> return a bandwidth ava
Tyler J. Wagner wrote at about 16:26:28 + on Tuesday, March 22, 2011:
> On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 10:47 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > Agreed - I've always thought it would be nice if backuppc were aware of
> > hosts grouped on a network route as well and could separately limit the
> > concur
On 3/22/2011 11:02 AM, Tod Detre wrote:
>> Agreed - I've always thought it would be nice if backuppc were aware of
>> hosts grouped on a network route as well and could separately limit the
>> concurrency within the those groups. Maybe it could be generalized
>> with a concept of how much impact
On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 10:47 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Agreed - I've always thought it would be nice if backuppc were aware of
> hosts grouped on a network route as well and could separately limit the
> concurrency within the those groups. Maybe it could be generalized
> with a concept of ho
> Agreed - I've always thought it would be nice if backuppc were aware of
> hosts grouped on a network route as well and could separately limit the
> concurrency within the those groups. Maybe it could be generalized
> with a concept of how much impact a run will have on total concurrency
> (to l
On 3/22/2011 9:26 AM, Jeff Schmidt wrote:
>
> not to jack this thread, but the concept of 'groups' would be extremely
> beneficial in virtualized environments (let's not backup /all/ of the
> vm's on a single physical host at the same time). I've seen some talk of
> using a semaphore
> (http://www.
On Tue, 2011-03-22 at 07:31 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/22/11 7:10 AM, Scott wrote:
> > If there is a different place to submit features, I apologize.
> >
> > It would be great if there were a field for machine description - for
> > example
> > for location or similar.
> >
> > Most of the ma
Lord Sporkton wrote at about 02:56:59 -0700 on Tuesday, March 22, 2011:
> I was hoping to setup a backend storage system for this to allow me to
> use a much larger file system than is typically available locally. I
> was looking at using an NFS share and connecting backuppc to the NFS
> share.
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/22/11 6:35 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
>> This is a linux server backing up a linux client.
>>
>> 2011-03-22 07:00:02 Can't find host nbecker1 via netbios
>>
>> Yeah, the client wasn't connected at that time. But I don't want to use
>> netbios
>> to resolve the name. It's a
On 3/22/11 7:10 AM, Scott wrote:
> If there is a different place to submit features, I apologize.
>
> It would be great if there were a field for machine description - for example
> for location or similar.
>
> Most of the machines I deal with are 'tagged' with a number. We usually name
> the mac
On 3/22/11 6:35 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
> This is a linux server backing up a linux client.
>
> 2011-03-22 07:00:02 Can't find host nbecker1 via netbios
>
> Yeah, the client wasn't connected at that time. But I don't want to use
> netbios
> to resolve the name. It's a linux client. Why isn't it
If there is a different place to submit features, I apologize.
It would be great if there were a field for machine description - for
example for location or similar.
Most of the machines I deal with are 'tagged' with a number. We usually
name the machine with this number, so in backuppc I see a
This is a linux server backing up a linux client.
2011-03-22 07:00:02 Can't find host nbecker1 via netbios
Yeah, the client wasn't connected at that time. But I don't want to use
netbios
to resolve the name. It's a linux client. Why isn't it using dns?
-
I was hoping to setup a backend storage system for this to allow me to
use a much larger file system than is typically available locally. I
was looking at using an NFS share and connecting backuppc to the NFS
share. As I understand it NFS has no real limit on the filesystem size
other than that of
17 matches
Mail list logo
