Hi, Brian,

on Dienstag, 30. November 2004 at 20:01 you wrote to amanda-users:

BC> This was the output of the 3rd amanda run on Samar.
BC> Here we have the corrected tape capacity, corrected columnspec,
BC> the presence of a holding area.

BC> I was going to

[...]

BC> I'm not gonna though, I have to look at the previous report more
BC> carefully

[...]

BC> It may be that we should have had more level 0 and fewer level 1 but
BC> I have yet to make that determination.

[...]

BC> I can say however that we had some concurrency, as many as two gnutar
BC> runs at the same time and that we saw none of the failures associated
BC> with losing a DLE to EOT. Of course I think we backed up so little data
BC> that it fit all on one tape volume so this wasn't really a valid test.

(lev0 has happened for most of your DLEs once, so the schedule tends
to be : lev1 ;-) )

---

I know that you as the responsible admin tend to see things
pessimistic. It is your job to do so, and I understand this perfectly
as I am "the responsible admin" for several sites, too.

We can't afford to be too OPTIMISTIC, do we? ;-)

I also know from my view as an active member of the list that your
installation is still in the process of development.

My view is more optimistic, maybe ;-)

---

The algorithm(s) of AMANDA develop(s) a working schedule over the
first one or two tapecycles (at least), so it ain't surprising that a
pretty big configuration (like your Samar) gives a few NOTEs and
WARNINGs before it develops a fitting schedule.

I think you should give AMANDA some more runs to "get the picture",
apart from the fact that you have pretty much data to backup your
reports look good to me so far.

See the reply to your other mail as well ..

-- 
best regards,
Stefan

Stefan G. Weichinger
mailto:monitor AT oops.co DOT at