Amanda-Users

Re: Amanda client stopped working

2005-05-20 11:18:22
Subject: Re: Amanda client stopped working
From: Guy Dallaire <clepeterd AT gmail DOT com>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 11:04:34 -0400
2005/5/20, Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com>:
> On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 10:22:10AM -0400, Guy Dallaire wrote:
> > The problem I encountered yesterday with one of the clients continues:
> >
> > amanda cannot get the estimates (and the backups) from a particular
> > client. There seems to be some sort of networking problem.
> >
> > The client is in the DMZ, protected by the firewall.  I even
> > recompiled amanda to make sure it is using a predefined set of UDP
> > ports (850-859) and I looked at the firewall logs, no errors. I have
> > checked the dumper.1 log and the dumpers are using the UDP port in the
> > range specified.
> 
> Don't know if this is your problem, I've never setup firewall environments.
> But the first line of the "docs/PORT.USAGE" document says:
> 
>     Amanda uses both UDP and TCP ports during its operation.
> 

Yes Jon, we even opened up the firewall and still have the problem.

Furthermore, there is progress:

I have created a similar config, and tried to backup only a small 
portion of the host. It worked. Now, I have started a full dump of the
whole host in the same config and so far, it works. Why ? I don't know
! Before trying this, I rebooted the amanda tape server, but I don't
think that's what fixed the problem.

Also, the new config is using ufsdump instead of tar for the / file
system of the host. I'll switch to tar later and try to reproduce the
problem. Problem started occuring on this host when I switched the /
file system from ufsdump to tar, then issued an amadmin force for the
/ filesystem. Next run, it hung and refused to work ever since...

Could it be the etimeout ? I really dont think so, according to the
logs, the estimated takes  a lot less time than 600 seconds !

I'll keep you informed 

Thanks


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>