> Wow, that's old. No chance of upgrading, I assume?
Not anytime soon. This machine is the file server and backup server. It's
*ROCK* stable and management doesn't want me fiddling with it.
Thanks for the input, I hope this works! :)
--------------------------
David Olbersen
iGuard Engineer
11415 West Bernardo Court
San Diego, CA 92127
1-858-676-2277 x2152
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Baker-LePain [mailto:jlb17 AT duke DOT edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 8:21 AM
> To: David Olbersen
> Cc: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
> Subject: Re: Large partitions
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 at 7:53am, David Olbersen wrote
>
> > So I've read:
> > Can Amanda span large file systems across multiple tapes?
> > http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/32.html
> >
> > Which says to use tar and read:
> > Why does `amdump` report 'results missing'?
> > http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/9.html
> >
> > And I'm quite confused based on the two. I obviously don't
> want to have
> > any problems using tar, and that last article doesn't leave
> me with the
> > idea that things have been fixed!
>
> What things? I think the reference in the first FOM entry is
> a bit of
> a red herring.
>
> > I also read the recent posts which make it sound like tar will work
> > just fine.
>
> It will.
>
> > Due to other reasons I'm using amanda-2.4.1p1 on the backup
> server, and
> > newer versions on the clients.
>
> Wow, that's old. No chance of upgrading, I assume?
>
> > Any suggestions? This partition could end up being ~100GB
> or even 200GB.
>
> Yes, use tar and come on back if problems arise. With a
> version of amanda
> that old on the server, you won't be able to use include lists, just
> excludes. But that should work be OK.
>
> --
> Joshua Baker-LePain
> Department of Biomedical Engineering
> Duke University
>
>
|