Author: "Michael Packer" <pac AT stingrayboats DOT com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 08:22:25 -0400
The changes took it from 8+ hours to 4:45.... still would like to get it down a bit more... I still have a problem with compsec (made a typo) so I reformatted it by hand. Questions... would it be ben
Author: Paul Bijnens <paul.bijnens AT xplanation DOT com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:19:05 +0200
The backup itself is now done in 2:35. The rest of the time is done by taping the chunks. You are in the pathological case where: 1. dumping to tape is bad, because your system cannot keep the tape s
Author: Joshua Baker-LePain <jlb17 AT duke DOT edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:22:26 -0400 (EDT)
What changes? *snip* *snip* I'm assuming that the tape drive is on localhost? If so, don't even bother with the holding disk -- it's only slowing you down (see how run time is roughly 2X dump time).
Author: "Michael Packer" <pac AT stingrayboats DOT com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:16:17 -0400
Well this time ... I removed the large disk so I could run it a couple times today and see what numbers I was getting. I also removed the holding disk since the tape and drives are all on the same ma
Author: Joshua Baker-LePain <jlb17 AT duke DOT edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:29:01 -0400 (EDT)
Amanda runs a faux dump on all DLEs to estimate how large the backups will be, for planning purposes. If this has been done before, I apologize, but I can't recall your hardware, OS, and backup softw