Re: Is tape spanning documented anywhere?

Subject:

From:

Toralf Lund <toralf AT procaptura DOT com>

To:

Date:

Tue, 13 Jun 2006 17:20:13 +0200

Jon LaBadie wrote:

On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:46:31PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
Normally I would agree, but I have to back up 3Tb of data organised asone single volume. The only "simple" option would be to have one 3Tbtape as well, but such a thing isn't available (to me at least.)
Toralf,
perhaps I'm being dense, but why isn't your situation satisfied by
the current tape-spanning.  I'm envisioning something like lto-2
or lto-3 drives and using no holding disk but sufficient buffer
space.  If your data compresses to say 1.6TB with the 400GB lto-3
tapes, a setting of runtapes 5 or 6 will accept an entire level 0
dump with only part of the final tape wasted.

Well, like I just said in another post - maybe I worry to much, but I'ma bit concerned about dumping 5 or 6 tapes during one run and nothingduring others, based in timing/system load considerations. It just seemsnicer to spread the work as evenly as possibly across runs...

And like I also said, in general, allowing "partial flush" would alsoaddress another issue: The one of blocking the entire tape operationwhen using a holding disk, and getting a dump larger that won't fit onthe <runtape> tapes even though it was expected to (either because ofmiscalculations during the planner phase or because it specifying thetape size seems to be a rather inexact science.)


We're talking about an LTO-2 changer, by the way...

- Toralf

<Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread>

Previous by Date:

Re: Is tape spanning documented anywhere?, Toralf Lund

Next by Date:

Re: Is tape spanning documented anywhere?, Joshua Baker-LePain

Previous by Thread:

Re: Is tape spanning documented anywhere?, Jon LaBadie

Next by Thread:

Re: Is tape spanning documented anywhere?, Toralf Lund

Indexes:

[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]