On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:27:18PM -0500, Matt Hyclak wrote:
> You're getting your math confused, I think. If your tapetype defines
> compression, then what is in your holding disk is already compressed. Your
> tape drive should be in non-compression mode then and should hold 20GB of
> *already compressed* data. What space that data takes up when uncompressed
> should be close to 40GB, but depends on how well it compressed. If I
> remember correctly, amanda had already written about 10GB of *already
> compressed* data to the drive, and was then trying to write a 20GB
> *uncompressed* partition after that. Amanda thought that the 20GB would
> compress to 10GB and therefore fit on the 20GB capacity tape, but she was
> wrong. So, if she had been able to get it all on there, you would have had
> about 20GB of already compressed data, which would expand to about 40GB when
> uncompressed. 

OK, now *here's* an explanation that made its' way through my thick
skull! :-)  Thanks, Matt.  I'm not sure if I fell more or less stupid
now... :-)

-- 
John Oliver, CCNA                            http://www.john-oliver.net/
Linux/UNIX/network consulting         http://www.john-oliver.net/resume/
***               sendmail, Apache, ftp, DNS, spam filtering         ***
****                Colocation, T1s, web/email/ftp hosting          ****