--- In amanda-users AT yahoogroups DOT com, Jon LaBadie <jon@j...> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 11:55:45PM -0000, knappenschaenke wrote:
> > --- In amanda-users AT yahoogroups DOT com, Jon LaBadie <jon@j...>
wrote:
> Couple of things, I don't use DLT. You say you are using 35GB
tapes.
> But isn't the DLT4000 a 20GB drive? Are the larger tapes
compatible?
I think so, because I used these tapes (and the drive) on a WinNT-
Server before.
>
> From your original post you showed the results of mt status
commands.
> They all included lines like this:
>
> drive status = -2113928192
>
> I don't know what it should be, but that doesn't look right to me.
?????????????
>
> Two of the status outputs show a block size of 0, probably meaning
> "variable". But the other two show a fixed block size of
1024 "bytes".
> These two devices may not be usable by amanda as its minimal block
> size is 32 KByte.
No problem, I tested with all devices with the same results.
>
> You tried to show that the tape device was installed and working by
> using the command "tar -cf /dev/nst0 /tmp/myfiles". That device
had
> a "variable" block size and tar uses 10KByte by default. The tar
> command mimiced the success amanda had. When you ran amtapetype on
> /dev/nst0 it first reported:
>
> "Writing 128 Mbyte compresseable data: 29 sec"
>
> So a write comparable to your tar command succeeded. Then amanda
> rewound the tape and started a second write. That is when it
failed.
> Perhaps you could run a test that more closely matches amanda's
code
> by putting the following into a shell script and running it.
>
> mt -f /dev/nst0 rewind
> dd bs=32k if=/dev/random of=/dev/nst0 count=4000
> mt -f /dev/nst0 rewind
> dd bs=32k if=/dev/random of=/dev/nst0 count=4000
>
> It looks to me like the installation, or the configuration,
> of the drive is the problem.
> --
> Jon H. LaBadie jon@j...
> JG Computing
> 4455 Province Line Road (609) 252-0159
> Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
>
--------------------------------------------
First
--------------------------------------------
asterix: # mt -f /dev/nst0l rewind
asterix: # dd bs=32k if=/dev/random of=/dev/nst0 count=1000
0+1000 Datensätze ein
0+1000 Datensätze aus
13917 bytes (14 kB) copied, 5149,72 seconds, 0,0 kB/s
---------------------------------------------
Second
---------------------------------------------
asterix: # mt -f /dev/nst0l rewind
asterix: # dd bs=32k if=/dev/random of=/dev/nst0 count=1000
0+1000 Datensätze ein
0+1000 Datensätze aus
12938 bytes (14 kB) copied, 5764,14 seconds, 0,0 kB/s
So I didn´t test it with count=4000 !
|
