> Wow, that's old.  No chance of upgrading, I assume?

Not anytime soon. This machine is the file server and backup server. It's 
*ROCK* stable and management doesn't want me fiddling with it.

Thanks for the input, I hope this works! :)

--------------------------
David Olbersen 
iGuard Engineer
11415 West Bernardo Court 
San Diego, CA 92127 
1-858-676-2277 x2152


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Baker-LePain [mailto:jlb17 AT duke DOT edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 8:21 AM
> To: David Olbersen
> Cc: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
> Subject: Re: Large partitions
> 
> 
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 at 7:53am, David Olbersen wrote
> 
> > So I've read:
> >   Can Amanda span large file systems across multiple tapes?
> >     http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/32.html
> > 
> > Which says to use tar and read:
> >   Why does `amdump` report 'results missing'?
> >     http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/9.html
> >
> > And I'm quite confused based on the two. I obviously don't 
> want to have 
> > any problems using tar, and that last article doesn't leave 
> me with the 
> > idea that things have been fixed!
> 
> What things?  I think the reference in the first FOM entry is 
> a bit of 
> a red herring.
> 
> > I also read the recent posts which make it sound like tar will work 
> > just fine.
> 
> It will.
> 
> > Due to other reasons I'm using amanda-2.4.1p1 on the backup 
> server, and 
> > newer versions on the clients.
> 
> Wow, that's old.  No chance of upgrading, I assume?
> 
> > Any suggestions? This partition could end up being ~100GB 
> or even 200GB.
> 
> Yes, use tar and come on back if problems arise.  With a 
> version of amanda 
> that old on the server, you won't be able to use include lists, just 
> excludes.  But that should work be OK.
> 
> -- 
> Joshua Baker-LePain
> Department of Biomedical Engineering
> Duke University
> 
>