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

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

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
Bacula-devel mailing list

This mailing list archive is a service of Copilotco.