Or dedicate and archive a tape of tools.
Anyway, before I go any further I'll have a look at the
amanda-hacker archives.
> With the huge size of most tapes (relative to the size of Amanda, itself
> anyway), a potential solution to this issue would be to prepend an archive
> of extraction tools to the Amanda archive tape. Write the normal header,
> and include a tar file of extraction scripts that could scan the tape for
> contents, a copy of the scheduled backup plan for the day based on the
> planning phase of Amanda's nightly cycle, and anything else that is needed
> to do a bare-metal recovery from the Amanda tapes. You could even option it
>
> for those who feel that having this on every tape is overkill
> (--with-bootstrap=yes for the professionally paranoid (like me), and
> --with-bootstrap=no being the default).
>
> I am sure that this has been discussed before, but I missed it if the
> discussion was more than 6 months ago (when I joined the list).
>
> I would appreciate any feedback on the idea and improvements/shortcomings
> pointed out. I believe in ego-less programming: if it is a good idea, and
> will save my bacon, I will accept input from anyone.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Don
>
> Donald L. (Don) Ritchey
> E-mail: Donald.Ritchey AT exeloncorp DOT com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon LaBadie [mailto:jon AT jgcomp DOT com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 10:19 AM
> To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
> Subject: Re: wasted action of taper
>
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:22:20AM -0400, Matt Hyclak wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:10:15AM -0400, Jon LaBadie enlightened us:
> >
> > > Implementing the ability to split a DLE across multiple tapes would
> > > continue a trend away from a feature of amanda that attracted me;
> > > the ability to recover a dump using standard, non-amanda tools.
> > > The RAIT driver was the first salvo to degrade this feature.
> > >
> >
> > I agree with the statement about RAIT, but if amanda were spreading chunks
> > accross tapes, how would that lose the ability to restore with standard
> > tools? All you need to do is dd the n chunks off the tape, concatenate
> them
> > together, and you have a complete {dump,tar,etc.} archive waiting to go,
> no?
> > I think that would be extremely useful, and not turn so many people away
> > from such a great program....
>
>
> And Brian Cuttler asked:
> >
> > Couldn't you still recover from amanda tapes if the data where
> > written in 'chunksize' bits across more than a single tape ?
> >
> > I mean, keep the chunks in order so you can find them, append them
> > together when writing the tape to limit the amount of reassembly
> > work. How are chunks re-assembled by taper now ?
> >
> > Couldn't we recover with "# dd" and "# cat >>" or would reassemble
> > need to be more complex than that ?
>
>
> Its not so much that you "couldn't". More the effort involved, where
> the required information would be kept, and would existing implementations
> be affected.
>
> I suspect that with judicious use of dd and cat, I could reassemble a
> 3 tape RAIT dump. Not sure I'd want to try.
>
> With the current scheme I've even done an emergency recovery of some
> files on a WinNT system that had some ported unix utilities.
>
> Consider a situation where you have no amanda installation and no
> amanda records, only a tape, working tape drive, and a unix system.
> And you are under pressure to recover a file before the boss goes home ;)
>
> I was thinking of things like:
>
> - how to know/where to keep the chunk size
> - how do you know the tape file continues on to the next tape
> - how do you deal with the partial last chunk on the first tape
> which is duplicated on the next tape
> - how will the file header on the second tape be different from
> a file header for the start of a dump, will that break anything
>
> Nothing insurmountable, but nothing as simple as position the tape,
> dd skiping one block, optionally uncompres, unarchive. And certainly
> not as simple to describe or include in the file header.
>
> --
> 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)
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation
> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject
> to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies.
> This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments
> to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
> received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and
> permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any
> printout. Thank You.
> ************************************************************************
>
|
