Hi Robert,
Its all down to how well the data is compressed by the drive....
from your details I would say you have some medium sized databases which are
backed up and compressed, some zip files that are already compressed to the
limit and lots of text files in one place that can be compressed by up to
80%.
If all your tapes were storing 120GB or more, I would have suggested that
you should experiment with compression at source to free off some network
bandwidth.
It all looks normal to me... Don't worry!
(BTW: I have a couple of Scalar100's and an LTO library with very similar
results)
If you have lots of free time, you could set up different backups for
different data types/locations based on compressability, then compress some
at source.... personally I am too busy!!
Rgds.Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Ouzen [mailto:rouzen AT UNIV.HAIFA.AC DOT IL]
Sent: 22 January 2004 16:46
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Cartridge Estimated capacity
Hi to all
Can anybody tell me why the huge difference between the numbers of
Estimated Capacity of a full cartidge DLT8000 (40/80 G). The format of the
devclass was configure to DRIVE.
The nodes are backup without compression .
Here the output of the q vol.
Volume Name Storage Device Estimated Pct Volume
Pool Name Class Name Capacity Util Status
(MB)
------------------------ ----------- ---------- --------- -----
--------
000002 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 58,089.8 96.5 Full
SS
000009 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 165,222.0 64.6 Full
SS
000016 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 76,230.3 49.1 Full
SS
000027 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 65,272.7 40.9 Full
SS
000034 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 80,000.0 3.9 Filling
SS
000044 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 136,684.2 62.8 Full
SS
000111 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 48,768.3 44.5 Full
SS
000141 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 51,704.7 40.6 Full
SS
000158 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 70,574.6 97.3 Full
SS
000159 SCA_UNIX SCALARCLA- 80,000.0 62.9 Filling
T.I.A Regards
Robert Ouzen
E-mail: rouzen AT univ.haifa.ac DOT il
Fortis-Disclaimer.txt
Description: Text document
|