On Monday 19 December 2005 20:35, Dan Brown wrote:
>Whoops, this was meant to go to the entire list.
>
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Monday 19 December 2005 17:53, Dan Brown wrote:
>>>I have recently just upgraded amanda an amanda installation from
>>>2.4.4p1 and upgraded the backup host from RedHat 7.3 to Fedora FC4.
>>>
>>>I've also conglomerated the backed up hosts from several
>>>configurations which ran independantly of each other, into a single
>>>configuration which amanda will manage itself (hopefully well).
>>>Other than the move of all hosts from their respective
>>> configurations into one, not much else has changed.
>>>
>>>There is a host however in this new config whose backups magically
>>>disappear after the first chunk.  This host is a temporary copy of
>>>the old backup host, something which will sit in the backup
>>> rotation for a month or two to ensure we don't need any files off
>>> of the machine before it's completely wiped out.
>>>Strangely enough, level 0 backups don't want to be dumped to the
>>>holding disks either.  This is the mailout from amanda after the
>>>backup attempt (I've removed all other hosts in order to debug
>>>this).  The holding disks are 150GB and 50GB in size respectively,
>>>both more than enough to hold any one part of the split up disks.
>>
>> Ahh, but what is the value of the reserved keyword in your
>> holdiingdisk definition section of your amanda.conf?
>>
>> By default, all holdingdisk space is reserved for incremental
>> backups, which prevents it from being used for level 0's.  I have
>> around 25GB free there, with a reserved setting of -500m, which
>> means it can use all but the last 500 megs for level 0's.
>
>Actually, I had initially forgotten to uncomment that a couple of
> days ago and gotten the dumps rejected right away.  Right now, both
> the 150GB and the 50GB disks are set to be filled up to capacity
> -1Gb.  I also have only 30% of the disks (or is this the entire
> holding disk set?) reserved for only incremental dumps.
>
>Do I have to set this in each holding disk definition when I have
> more than one holding disk?
>
Yes, I believe this is a per disk definition.
>
>---
>Dan Brown
>monkeypants AT shaw DOT ca

-- 
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should use this
address: <gene.heskett AT verizononline DOT net> which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules.  I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.