On Thursday 13 April 2006 16:51, David Boyes wrote:
Kind of a misleading name, though. It's really a volume state
indication
-- eg, the volume is mountable or not.
In its current usage, I find it to be the best name. It indicates if
the
volume is in the changer or not.
It does
On Tuesday 11 April 2006 20:41, David Boyes wrote:
Sorry, but I don't understand what a MOVE VOLUME -- or rather what
an
operator area is. I do understand the concept of an area that is
accessible
from the outside without opening the library case.
Sorry -- terminology thing again. In
I'm also unclear on whether Bacula currently tracks which volumes
are
in an autochanger. Right now, I have two volumes that are both
recorded in the database as InChanger = 1 and Slot = 4, but it's
not obvious which tape is actually in the changer.
An interesting question. Would it be
Sorry, but I don't understand what a MOVE VOLUME -- or rather what
an
operator area is. I do understand the concept of an area that is
accessible
from the outside without opening the library case.
Sorry -- terminology thing again. In the very large libraries (the big
STK and IBM silos), the
Kind of a misleading name, though. It's really a volume state
indication
-- eg, the volume is mountable or not.
In its current usage, I find it to be the best name. It indicates if
the
volume is in the changer or not.
It does work, but I think it reflects an assumption born of Bacula's
Hello,
This Scratch pool algorithm problem has turned out to be quite interesting. As
it turns out, the guys that asked for the change in the algorithm were
correct and the guys that are complaining about the change in the algorithm
are correct, and best of all I think I have a solution that
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, John Kodis wrote:
On a somewhat related note, I'm not clear on how the tape selection
algorithm is altered when an autochanger is available. For example,
if there are two equally eligible volumes available, only one of which
is in the autochanger, would this volume be
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Kern Sibbald wrote:
I'd like to add a third. I don't use scratch pools at all, currently,
but I can't see why I'd want a new volume being added to the pool when
I've got one in there that's supposed to be used. Wouldn't that mean
that it would ALWAYS choose a scratch volume
On Tuesday 11 April 2006 13:06, Alan Brown wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Kern Sibbald wrote:
I'd like to add a third. I don't use scratch pools at all, currently,
but I can't see why I'd want a new volume being added to the pool when
I've got one in there that's supposed to be used. Wouldn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Kodis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:59:15AM +0100, Alan Brown wrote:
If there are recyclable pool volumes in the changer then use them, else
use available scratch pool volumes.
Otherwise the size of a tape pool can effectively grow
On Monday 10 April 2006 17:08, John Kodis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:59:15AM +0100, Alan Brown wrote:
If there are recyclable pool volumes in the changer then use them, else
use available scratch pool volumes.
Otherwise the size of a tape pool can effectively grow far more rapidly
On Monday 10 April 2006 17:29, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
John Kodis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:59:15AM +0100, Alan Brown wrote:
If there are recyclable pool volumes in the changer then use them, else
use available scratch pool volumes.
Otherwise the size of a tape pool can
Kern Sibbald a écrit :
On Monday 10 April 2006 17:29, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
John Kodis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:59:15AM +0100, Alan Brown wrote:
If there are recyclable pool volumes in the changer then use them, else
use available scratch pool volumes.
Otherwise the
On Monday 10 April 2006 18:07, Ludovic Strappazon wrote:
Kern Sibbald a écrit :
On Monday 10 April 2006 17:29, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
John Kodis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 11:59:15AM +0100, Alan Brown wrote:
If there are recyclable pool volumes in the changer then use them,
else
14 matches
Mail list logo
