Re: amanda inparallel not working on large filesystems
2003-08-15 09:07:01
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 09:06:41AM +0100, jason.walton AT nomadsoft.co DOT uk
wrote:
...
>
> STATISTICS:
> Total Full Daily
> -------- -------- --------
> Estimate Time (hrs:min) 0:12
> Run Time (hrs:min) 14:55
> Dump Time (hrs:min) 41:46 41:46 0:00
...
> STATISTICS:
> Total Full Daily
> -------- -------- --------
> Estimate Time (hrs:min) 0:12
> Run Time (hrs:min) 7:04
> Dump Time (hrs:min) 21:39 21:39 0:00
...
> STATISTICS:
> Total Full Daily
> -------- -------- --------
> Estimate Time (hrs:min) 0:14
> Run Time (hrs:min) 5:42
> Dump Time (hrs:min) 19:34 19:34 0:00
...
I'm not understanding something - nothing unusual there :)
I thought that "run time" was the total time it took to
complete the amdump run. I.e. including the estimate
phase, the dumping phase, and the taping phase. Further,
if there were no parallelism in the phases that it would
be approximately the sum of the three phases. But never
shorter than any of the single phases like your "dump time"s
each much longer that the total "run time"s.
What am I missing?
--
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)
|
|
|