Re: [Bacula-devel] The synthetic backup problem again (resurrected)

[Blake D. <blake@NXS.NET>]

> Hmm... that's not what I intended originally (though, as I'm not
> working on it myself, I won't object if somebody else does it
> differently).
>
> A volume that is actually written is by definition in a Location with
> cost=0; the default would be LocationId=0. Everything else does, IMO,
> not make sense.
>
> If you unload that volume, you'd mark it to be in a different location.
>
> Arno

My reasoning for the above is SDs in multiple datacenters. I definitely see the usefulness for locations to not be assumed to be local until removed. You can use this along with pools to set up offsite pools for other locations etc and have a nice automated tier system of capabilities spanning multiple sites.