Amanda-Users

Re: testing a patched tar question.

2007-04-07 13:45:28
Subject: Re: testing a patched tar question.
From: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett AT verizon DOT net>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org, amanda-hackers AT amanda DOT org
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2007 13:38:12 -0400
On Saturday 07 April 2007, Jon LaBadie wrote:
[...]>
>I suspect that a file is defined by the combination of its inode # and
>device id (maj,min).  If you take away consideration of the device id,
>then lots of files would be defined by the same, non-unique inode #.
>
>If all you took away were consideration for the maj device number,
>then systems with unique maj numbers for ide, sata, scsi, usb, ...
>could have files with the same remaining identifier (min, inode #).
>
>Unless there was a switch to something like the uuid (universal, unique
> id) scheme (which is hardly universal ;) I suspect we are stuck with
> device & inode # to define a file.

Well, my test run wasn't what I expected, so this effort is probably best 
abandoned.

What we are left with, when the linux kernel finally gets this patch for 
good (its been reverted for now based on my findings, but its a good 
patch, and really needs to be done at some point even if we do have to 
play a little 52 pickup by doing an amanda restart from square one, which 
will fix it when the patch hits production status)
we will have to treat amanda as if its a restart from square one, slowly 
feeding it the big dle's, one per run.

This is a case of being forewarned might be forearmed.  Not much else we 
can do at this point.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Data for intranet got routed through the extranet and landed on the 
internet.