Amanda-Users

Re: more fun with levels and estimates fubar

2006-07-28 11:05:45
Subject: Re: more fun with levels and estimates fubar
From: Jean-Francois Malouin <Jean-Francois.Malouin AT bic.mni.mcgill DOT ca>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 10:58:27 -0400
* Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com> [20060727 12:11]:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 10:26:28AM -0400, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:
> > Continuing with my estimate saga...
> > 
> > What would cause a level 1 backup of a DLE with gnutar
> > be as big as a full? Estimates are done with calcsize
> > and gnutar is 1.13.25 with amanda-2.4.5
> > 
> > Could it be that the gnutar-lists file is corrupted?
> > Looking at them I see that they all have the same size
> > for level 0 1 and 2...Normal?
> > 
> 
> Are the gnutar-lists files current?  I.e. are they being
> updated each night?  My "similar" problem had the system
> creating *.NEW files, but never renaming them after the dump.
> So I was always using old list files.  But "record no" (my
> problem) is not yours.

They seem to be current, but I don't understand how and when
they are generated.  And what's the content actually. Any
way of making sense of it?

> I recall from your original post that you were having
> problems with same size dumps from DLEs the used gnutar
> and others that used xfsdump.  The latter would not use
> gnutar-lists so I doubt the overall problem was there.

Correct. This is what is stumping me. 

xfsdump keeps an inventory and that
client had close to ~4000 entries in there.
I've checked and pruned them.

> 
> But just in case, what about permissions/ownership on the
> gnutar-list directories and their parent paths.
> 
> What about the curinfo files.  Are they being updated nightly?

all fine too, permission-wise that is.
 
> The solution to my problem was triggered by a several year-old
> thread were all levels were the same size.  The solution to
> that posters troubles was to stop running a script that nightly
> touched or chmod'ed all files on the DLEs.  Might you be having
> a similar situation such that all "ls -l" or "ls -cl" timestamps
> are current thus making it look like they require backing up?

I'll check into that but a first glance this is not the case.
I'll report back when I've sorted out this mess.


Thanks for tips John!

jf

> 
> -- 
> Jon H. LaBadie                  jon AT jgcomp DOT com
>  JG Computing
>  4455 Province Line Road        (609) 252-0159
>  Princeton, NJ  08540-4322      (609) 683-7220 (fax)

-- 
<° ><

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