[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bacula-devel] Trying out the VirtualFull feature.


Hello,
I hope you had a good holiday. Mine was mostly lazy, which is good sometimes.

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 05:34:51PM +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 August 2008 12:42:22 Graham Keeling wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 09:48:33PM +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > > The above segmentation problem is because you are running a relatively
> > > old kernel, which is broken -- or at least the header files and OS calls
> > > on your system do not correspond to the reality.
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > OK, thanks, I've got the regressions running on a different machine with a
> > newer kernel now, and the segfaults have gone away.
> >
> > I ran virtual-backup-test, and it told me that it completed OK.
> > However, I was suspicious, so I watched carefully what it was doing.
> >
> > It looks to me as if it is doing exactly what I was seeing with my original
> > setup, where the VirtualFull only includes the previous Full and misses out
> > the differentials and incrementals.
> >
> > To prove this, I made a couple of changes to virtual-backup-test (the patch
> > is attached to this email). I also made sure that 'Accurate = yes' was set
> > on the backup job definitions in the bacula-dir.conf, but I don't think
> > that matters.
> >
> > Before the first full backup, I echoed the date to a file in the area that
> > that gets backed up. Then I echoed the (new) date to the same file just
> > before the last incremental backup.
> > I would then expect the restore before and after the subsequent VirtualFull
> > to give the same results, but they don't.
> > The test reports the following:
> >
> >   !!!!! virtual-backup-test failed!!! 11:27:21 !!!!!
> >   !!!!! Restored files differ          !!!!!
> >    Status: backup=0 restore=0 diff=1
> >
> > Graham.
> 
> Yes, something is clearly going wrong with your backups.  All mine seem to be 
> working fine.  The fact that yours are failing worries me, because it means 
> we either have a bug (very likely with new code) or we have some simple way 
> that the configuration can be incorrect.  Whatever the case, we will need to 
> fix it.  Hopefully next week on return from vacation, I will have a bit more 
> time for fixing this and completing my documentation.


I wonder - if you try the virtual-backup-test (with my patch from my last
email) on your setup, does the test pass or succeed?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
Bacula-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel


This mailing list archive is a service of Copilotco.