From: Dan L. <da...@la...> - 2006-07-04 20:45:06
|
On 4 Jul 2006 at 22:31, Kern Sibbald wrote: > The reason for this email is to propose an alternate solution, which I think > would be much better. My proposal is to modify the job record for the > original job so that the Job type (currently B for backup) becomes "b" for > migrated backup job. The output would then look like: > > | 1 | MigrationJobSave | 2006-07-04 21:31:48 | b | F | 2,638 | 63,701,259 | T > > and now, it should be clear to the user that the job was migrated, and the > current code that does a restore will work with no changes. The only > remaining items would be to ensure that for operations like pruning, bscan, > dbcheck, ... that the code understands this new job type (the same problem I > have with the new "M" (migration) job type. > > Comments? My solution, before getting down to this part of your message, was going to be modify the original job. It's logical, because, after all, the job is no longer what it used to be. It's migrated. -- Dan Langille : Software Developer looking for work my resume: http://www.freebsddiary.org/dan_langille.php |