Amanda-Users

Re: big dump compare to tape size

2004-03-26 14:42:53
Subject: Re: big dump compare to tape size
From: Eric Siegerman <erics AT telepres DOT com>
To: amanda <amanda-users AT amanda DOT org>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:30:25 -0500
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 04:04:05PM +0100, BRINER Cedric wrote:
> the tapes are 70Gb

Is that 70 GB native, or with hardware compression taken into
account?  (If the latter, it can only be approximate; depends how
compressible the data is.)

Do you in fact have hardware compression enabled?  (See the list
archives for discussions as to (a) why that's usually considered
a bad thing, and (b) the difficulty in turning it off and making
it *stay* turned off when reusing tapes that were initially
written with it turned on.)

> and some dumps are about 30Gb
> 
> +   These dumps were to tape WeeklySet076. 
> +   *** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [[writing file: short write]].
> 
> so the tape have for example 45Gb already on it, when it tries to flush the 
> 30Gb. So I end up that:
>  the 30Gb is not flushed
>  the others dumps (40 dumps of 1Gb) are not dump to the tape. When a lot of 
> them could be dumped
>  
> So:
> -is amanda able to maximise the amount on data that it stores or does it only 
> flush without any algorithm. 
> -or my config file which is uncorrect
> -or Is there a way to breaks into smaller pieces the big dumps 
> 
> my config file for the tape configuration
> 
> define tapetype DLT4000 {
>         length 40000 mbytes     # 40 Gig tapes
>         filemark 8 kbytes       # 16 also works, 32 doesn't
>         speed 1536 kbytes       # 6 Mb/s accd to Compaq   ??? see bellow def 
> of DLT
> }
> 
> thanks in advance
> 
> Cédric Briner
> 
--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        erics AT telepres DOT com
|  |  /
It must be said that they would have sounded better if the singer
wouldn't throw his fellow band members to the ground and toss the
drum kit around during songs.
        - Patrick Lenneau

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>