[Bug 459573] Re: variable expansion uses outdated data

[Kern Sibbald]

One of the reasons for using Bacula is so that you don't have to track what 
Volumes it is using. It does all the work for you, and if you trust it, you 
won't need particular Volume labels.

That said, If you really want to use Client based Volume labels, you can, but 
to do so, the only reasonable way is to work with Pools and either prelabel 
your Volumes, or use some labeling scheme such as you did.  If you do not use 
Pools, there is no way to absolutely guarantee that Bacula will write on a 
Volume you have just created.  With Pools, at least you can guarantee that it 
will write on a Volume within a given Pool.  There is a whole chapter in the 
manual describing this for Full, Differential, and Incremental backups, which 
can be easily extrapolated to Clients.

So, in my opinion, it isn't so much a question of a feature being "worse than 
useless", but rather learning which features will accomplish what you want.


On Monday 02 November 2009 04:38:38 Aidan Furlan wrote:
> I would certainly consider this a bug. It makes variable expansion worse
> than useless because I can no longer trust it to label volumes with the
> correct client or date, so that all the volume names are potentially
> misleading. To avoid misleading data I have gone back to using
> LabelFormat="Vol".

-- 
variable expansion uses outdated data
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/459573
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to bacula in ubuntu.