Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*NAK\:\s+amandad\s+busy\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*NAK\:\s+amandad\s+busy\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: "justin m. clayton" <justincl AT u.washington DOT edu>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:06:39 -0800 (PST); I've been receiving this error on some, but not always all, of my hosts during amcheck. What could be causing this issue? Which logs are most likely to be housing the magic info I need to solve this?; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00224.html (10,630 bytes)
2. Re: NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: Joshua Baker-LePain <jlb17 AT duke DOT edu>; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 09:24:34 -0500 (EST); If there's already an amandad running (i.e. one from a previous run that never died), you'll get this error. Look in /tmp/amanda/amandad*debug. Also look at the output of 'ps' when you get the error.; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00237.html (11,105 bytes)
3. Re: NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: Mitch Collinsworth <mitch AT ccmr.cornell DOT edu>; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:03:34 -0500 (EST); The other way this can happen is if you have multiple names in your disklist that refer to the same client machine. Amanda will consider them unique due to their names being different and try to cont; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00241.html (11,358 bytes)
4. NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: "Shawn Sanders" <ssanders AT tcs-sec DOT com>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:24:24 -0500; I am adding a new system to our amanda backup system. The system has a LARGE filesystem so I have to use tar to divide it up some. amcheck runs fine, but when amdump runs I get the following error in; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00447.html (12,413 bytes)
5. Re: NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: Dietmar Goldbeck <goldbeck AT e-trend DOT de>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:42:54 +0100; Please check the sendsize debug files and find out how long estimates are taking. If you are using an older version of GNUtar, estimates are extremely slow. I recommend upgrading to 1.13.25 I would i; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00462.html (13,818 bytes)
6. RE: NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: "Shawn Sanders" <ssanders AT tcs-sec DOT com>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:58:04 -0500; Thanks for the direction. The sendsize.debug shows it starting at == sendsize: debug 1 pid 25350 ruid 1026 euid 1026 start time Tue Feb 18 23:11:08 2 003 /usr/local/libexec/sendsize: version 2.4.2p1; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00476.html (15,838 bytes)
7. Re: NAK: amandad busy (score: 1): Author: Dietmar Goldbeck <goldbeck AT e-trend DOT de>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:36:12 +0100; The timeout gets multiplied with the number of filesystems and levels. I would set it to an hour for the next run. You should also increase dtimeout, since tar might take more than half an hour befor; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Amanda-Users/2003-02/msg00485.html (12,761 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]