My questions are:
1) is indeed bscan without -m and -s options the way to go?
2) the docs state that this comparison method is not 100% reliable with
the current version (1.26 (!)). What about the real current version? (or
actually in my case: version 5.0.2 )
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
The manual tends being so large tends to be somewhat out of date. If you
are using 5.0.2, you really should look at the 5.0.2 documentation (it
may not be online). The next best is to use the most recent
documentation for version 7.4.
There is currently no direct mechanism to compare two Volumes --
personally, I have never found a use or need for it.
If I wanted to compare two Volumes, providing they were mostly similar,
I would probably use some form of bls rather than bscan -- I am not even
sure if bscan will provide the kind of information you probably want as
it was designed to read the Volume and put the information into the
Catalog rather than display it.
On 02/06/2017 03:43 PM, Olaf Zevenboom wrote:
> Goal: Compare two volumes.
> Reason: suddenly volumes which should be more or less equal in size
> start to differ by 80% growth. I want to find out why.
> I am using diskbased backup so a compare from a physical volume to a
> catalog would also be fine.
> When looking at the documentation I noticed that a certain paragraph
> seems never to have been updated: paragraph 1.7.1. in for instance
> http://www.bacula.org/7.2.x-manuals/en/utility/utility.pdf >
> My questions are:
> 1) is indeed bscan without -m and -s options the way to go?
> 2) the docs state that this comparison method is not 100% reliable with
> the current version (1.26 (!)). What about the real current version? (or
> actually in my case: version 5.0.2 )