On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:

runspercycle does not need to be changed.  The "runtapes" means that
for each run up to that number of tapes may be used (note: not "must").

You have to increase your tapecycle probably to cover the same dumpcycle(s), because you'll burn twice as much tapes for each run.

(well, "burn", hopefully not litteraly).

I'm still not sure I understand. If I have

runspercycle 2

and

runtapes 2

will amanda try to distribute the full dumps across 4 tapes, or just 2?

When I think about it, the first answer makes most sense, as the parameter otherwise ought to have been called "tapespercycle".

"Sense" is a funny thing.

Amanda will "try" to fit each run on a single tape.  But will use a
second tape during that run if necessary.

Ah, I see. So it won't actually multiply tape size by runtapes when trying to figure out how much it can write... I'm not sure the functionaltiy is of much use to me then, but perhaps I could cheat and pretend the tapes are "runtapes" times larger than they really are?

Won't buy you anything.  Amanda will reach the actual end of the tape
and not be able to go on to a second tape because runtapes is 1.

[ ... ]

Total data, yes.  Data per DLE, no.  Because amanda can not deal with
individual DLE's larger than a single tape capacity.  But it will happily
put 10 DLE's on the first tape, 20 on the second and 4 on the third if
that is what fits, is needed, and runtapes is >= 3.

Yes, I knew that, of course.

But actually, one of the reasons why I'm asking about runtapes > 1 is that I've considered setting up so that everything is dumped in one run...

Assuming that each individual DLE, when given a level 0, fits on a single
tape, then set dumpcycle = 0, runspercycle = 1, and runtapes = 1000.

- Toralf