On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 09:46:31AM +0100, Martin Oehler wrote:
> Hmm, the only option that sounds like it could speed up the [amtapetype] 
> process
> is blocksize. Does anyone know a good value for this? 

The same value as amdump will be using!  With some tape
technologies, the tape's capacity depends very much on the block
size.  In such a case, using a different block size for the test
would give misleading results.


On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 10:28:38AM +0100, Martin Oehler wrote:
> My second problem is how to handle the "short write"?
> I have to send in the tape, but the are 3-4 GB of data on this tape.
> Without this data, my backup is inconsistent. The only possibility
> I see (at the moment) is doing a full backup of the partitions having
> some data on this tape.

That's one possibility.  You can use "amadmin force", staging the
full backups over a few runs if necessary to fit them in.
Another possibility would be to wait a tapecycle (or at the very
least a dumpcycle) for the backups to expire on their own.
(Don't forget to erase the tape before sending it back, if it
contains anything confidential.)

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        erics AT telepres DOT com
|  |  /
It must be said that they would have sounded better if the singer
wouldn't throw his fellow band members to the ground and toss the
drum kit around during songs.
        - Patrick Lenneau