->>In response to your message<<-
--received from Jon LaBadie--
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 07:13:09PM -0700, Paul Yeatman wrote:
> > Hi, I'm testing my backup system and am finding something unexpected.
> >
> > I'm using amanda 2.4.4p3-1 on a server running RedHat linux ES 4.
> > The restore I'm attempting is performed all on the server using a
> > spare disk on the server.
> >
> > When I run amrecover and add--"add ."--a partition that has 7 levels of
> > incrementals and then type "list", it shows the tape (actually the
> > server is a tapeless server so it is really on disk) with the original
> > full backup on it and then levels 6 and 7 on the holding disk. All
> > other levels are skipped. Levels 1-5 are not included in the
> > planned restore.
> >
> > I would expect it to restore the latest of each incremental level
> > 1-7. I currently have several holding disks and can confirm that the
> > incremental directories that an 'amadmin info' shows for the same
> > partition exist. When "amrecover" is executed, it shows "found amanda
> > directory" from all expected holding disks and holding disk directories
> > and the directories needed for this restore in particular. If I
> > remove the holding disk from amanda.conf that "holds" levels 6 and 7,
> > then no levels after the original "tape" are listed in the planned
> > restore.
>
>
> Same initial thought as JLM, perhaps nothing changed in the directory
> during the incremental levels 1-5.
I have never seen Amanda do this before yet possibly new behavior.
I mentioned more in my response to JLM.
>
>
> > This particular partition was backed up in 2005-05-04. On the first
> > holding disk, the latest level 1 is in inc directory 20050509, the
> > latest level 2 is in 20060510, and then the rest of the incremental
> > directories on the holding disk (until the next holding disk) are level
> > 3's for this partition. If I include only this one holding disk in my
> > amanda.conf, this is what the "amindexd.20070417184329.debug" shows
> > (full file attached)
> >
>
> I would presume that this is a fairly stable, unchanging storage.
> I base that guess on the fact that the last full backup was May 2005
> and the first incremental a year later in May of 2006. Another clue
> is that the incrementals haven't been moved from the holding disk
> to tape (physical or virtual) in the last year.
Very sorry about that. The "2005-05-04" should have been 2006-05-04,
so the bump from level 1 to level 2 occurred five days later on
20060510. So, yes, it has not gone through all 9 levels in a
year's time but not quite as "stable" as my error made it appear.
Also, as for the "clue", I have an unusual config for which I am making
full backups once a year leaving everything on the holding disk in
between (never running "amflush" and keeping dual copies of both
"tapes" and holding disk). I'm right at the point of making another
set of full backups and so am taking the time to make sure the set I
have is fully recoverable.
Paul
>
> --
> 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)
--
Paul Yeatman (858) 534-9896 pyeatman AT ucsd DOT edu
==================================
==Proudly brought to you by Mutt==
==================================
|
