On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 11:02:22AM -0500, Ivan Petrovich wrote:
> 
> Also, for this set, I have over 100GB of data, which works out to be
> about 30GB (both levels 0 and 1) spread out over a cycle of 4 days and
> 5 tapes. Each nightly run takes 4 hours--uncompressed.
> 
> I might try turning on software compression and see if, after one
> night of needing 8 hrs to run to gather the compression ratios, it
> will settle back to the 4 hr run time.
> 
> But at this point, I also don't have a real need for compression for
> the following reasons. Please tell me if you think any of them is
> silly.
> - I like the idea of a 1-week tape cycle, with only 4 runs and using 5
> tapes each week. I don't wish to make the cycle any smaller because I
> like to have several days' worth of backup.

To be accurate, the tapecycle is NOT a time period,
it is an integer value, the number of tapes in rotation.
Or from amanda's perspective, the number of tapes that
must be used before a tape can be used again.  In my
case I have 18 tapes in rotation and have tapecycle
set to 12.  Most sites probably have the tapecycle
set to equal the actual number of tapes in rotation.

The dumpcycle is a time period, the maximum period between
level 0's dumps.


-- 
Jon H. LaBadie                  jon AT jgcomp DOT com
 JG Computing
 4455 Province Line Road        (609) 252-0159
 Princeton, NJ  08540-4322      (609) 683-7220 (fax)