Gene,
> You have over 5 gigabytes of mail? I find that hard to believe, not
> even a major spammer would have that much.
<having nothing to do with the actual discussion>
Depends, number of users, number of users that use eudora and keep
mail on server, attachments... I've got close to 50 gig of mail on
my mailhost system - and you aught to see what the Lotus Notes users
have in the way of mail...
---
Brian R Cuttler brian.cuttler AT wadsworth DOT org
Computer Systems Support (v) 518 486-1697
Wadsworth Center (f) 518 473-6384
NYS Department of Health Help Desk 518 473-0773
> On Tuesday 04 November 2003 01:06, Turgut Kalfaoglu wrote:
> >Hello - I am making great progress with Amanda; now backing up three
> >systems. (For some reason, samba backups did not work for me; but
> >installing the amanda client on our windows server did the trick; I
> > can backup over that). We have a dedicated machine to do the
> > backups, and it backs up two unix servers (one Linux one SunOS
> > 5.8), and a windows machine.
> >
> >One puzzling thing is that our SunOS system seems to
> >take a very long time making backups. I started a full backup about
> > 12 hours ago, and it's still running. If I wait long enough, it
> > finishes (I did it once before), but I would like it to finish in a
> > regular timeframe. There is no bottleneck as far as I can tell; the
> > machines are mostly idle; the network connection is 100MB like the
> > other machines. I am not very good at reading the 'amstatus' output
> > so I thought I would ask for help from this very helpful group..
> >
> >[amanda@yedek amanda]$ amstatus home | more
> >Using /usr/adm/amanda/DailySet1/amdump from Mon Nov 3 23:25:26 EET
> > 2003
> >
> >home:/etc 0 6296k finished (23:46:28)
> >home:/usr/local 0 552408k finished (3:32:29)
> >home:/usr/users 0 1516665k dumping to tape (3:32:29)
> >home:/var/spool/mail 0 5028910k wait for dumping
>
> You have over 5 gigabytes of mail? I find that hard to believe, not
> even a major spammer would have that much.
>
> >SUMMARY part real estimated
> > size size
> >partition : 4
> >estimated : 4 7227450k
> >flush : 0 0k
> >failed : 0 0k ( 0.00%)
> >wait for dumping: 1 5028910k ( 69.58%)
> >dumping to tape : 1 1516665k ( 20.98%)
> >dumping : 0 0k 0k ( 0.00%) ( 0.00%)
> >dumped : 3 2075369k 2198540k ( 94.40%) ( 28.72%)
> >wait for writing: 0 0k 0k ( 0.00%) ( 0.00%)
> >wait to flush : 0 0k 0k (100.00%) ( 0.00%)
> >writing to tape : 0 0k 0k ( 0.00%) ( 0.00%)
> >failed to tape : 0 0k 0k ( 0.00%) ( 0.00%)
> >taped : 2 558704k 681875k ( 81.94%) ( 7.73%)
> >3 dumpers idle : not-idle
> >taper writing, tapeq: 0
> >network free kps: 6570
> >holding space : 0k ( 0.00%)
> > dumper0 busy : 4:03:57 (100.00%)
> > taper busy : 4:03:57 (100.00%)
> > 0 dumpers busy : 0:00:00 ( 0.00%)
> > 1 dumper busy : 4:03:57 (100.00%) not-idle: 4:03:57
> > (100.00%)
> >
> >I just checked the 'home' system; the one that's being backed up,
> > and it shows that 'tar' is running, likewise for two 'sendbackup'
> > processes. The last entry in /tmp/amanda belongs to amandad, and it
> > has not been updated for about 4 hours. it reads:
> >CONNECT DATA 921 MESG 922 INDEX 923
> >OPTIONS features=fffffeff9ffe0f;
> >----
> >
> >amandad: time 0.133: got packet:
> >----
> >Amanda 2.4 ACK HANDLE 000-A8E80608 SEQ 1067894728
> >----
> >
> >amandad: time 0.133: pid 8343 finish time Tue Nov 4 03:29:37 2003
> >
> >I guess this means that it finished.
> >
> >PS: I dont have a tape drive define; I backup to disk using the very
> >useful chg-disk "changer". Therefore I did not define any holding
> > disks.
> >
> >I'd appreciate any feedback..
> >Thanks, -turgut
> >
> I sure don't see, from the above report, a reason it should be so
> slow. Is the system quiet, or are the drives being hammered by
> seeks?
>
> Whatever you find, we would be interested in the fix for our own
> edification.
>
> >-----
> >Turgut Kalfaoglu: http://www.kalfaoglu.com
> >EgeNet Internet Services: http://www.egenet.com.tr
>
> --
> Cheers, Gene
> AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
> Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M
> 99.27% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
> Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
> by Gene Heskett are:
> Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
>
|
