Backup Copy Job Archive

[nick3young]

Hi All,

I have had a 'backup copy job' running for over a year... and foolishly on my part, the repository has just reached capacity (30TB).

I have it configured for 2 restore points and then the following archive backups: 4 weekly, 2 monthly, 3 quarterly and 1 yearly.

I know this is bad practice but I've had to delete one of the oldest VBK files - I needed a quick fix. For some reason I had a backup VBK just after the 'yearly' one with no code after it e.g. it didn't have the "_Y" or "_Q". So a good candidate for deletion.

For the long term... I have removed the 4 weekly backups from the archive. I will have to just make do with the 'monthly', 'quarterly' and 1 'yearly'. So zero weekly backups. Can anyone see this causing a problem with my archived backups?

And finally, I seem to have loads of incremental restore points... almost one for every day in the month of January before the repository reached capacity (14 in total). Why is this when I have set the job to only keep 2 restore points?

Thanks
Nick

[DGrinev]

Hi Nick,

Can anyone see this causing a problem with my archived backups?

Nope, since the GFS restore points are independent from each other.

Can you provide the interval value ("copy every") of the copy job and tell me if the checkbox called "Read the entire restore point from the source..." is checked? Thanks!

[nick3young]

Thanks for the the reply DGrinev.

'Read the entire restore point from the source' is not checked.... should I have it checked?

Cheers
Nick

[DGrinev]

Hi,

Nope, that was an assumption related to a big amount of incremental files, but if it unchecked, then I'd recommend you to contact the support team, as this behavior is unexpected.
With simple retention set to 2 you should always have 2 restore points - one full backup followed by one increment, since BCJ is utilizing Forever forward incremental backup method by default. Thanks!

[foggy]

Those could be incomplete restore points or result of a failed merge operation. Indeed, it's better contact support for a closer look.

[nick3young]

Ok. Thanks for your thoughts. I'll get a case logged with support.

Cheers
Nick

[DGrinev]

Nick,

Please do not forget to share the case ID here, so we can track it internally. Thanks!

[nick3young]

Case ID is: 02613603