Expanding on JLM's accurate comment.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:07:45AM -0400, Steven Settlemyre wrote:
> I am looking to restore a disk from one of my machines and am having a
> little trouble understanding which report to believe. Using amadmin
> find, I see there was a level 0 on 4/12 and again on 4/19.
>
> When I look at the daily reports I see on 4/12:
>
> pop:/files1.0 in-memory
> taper: no split_diskbuffer specified: using fallback split size of 10240kb
> to buffer
I'm guessing you did specify a split_diskbuffer later on, before 4/19.
Since no split_diskbuffer was specified, tiny pieces of 10MB were used
resulting in 973 pieces.
> and
>
> HOSTNAME DISK L ORIG-kB OUT-kB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s
> MMM:SS KB/s
> -------------------------- -------------------------------------------
> -------------
> pop /files1 0 17024192 9961504 58.5 178:38 926.5 178:39
> 929.4
>
>
> Then on 4/19 i see:
>
> NOTES:
> planner: Incremental of pop:/files1 bumped to level 3.
>
Planning goes through many steps, one is to decide whether to bump
to a higher level if an incremental is done. It was planning to
do so. But at a later step, other considerations superceded this
because:
> and
>
> HOSTNAME DISK L ORIG-kB OUT-kB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s
> MMM:SS KB/s
> -------------------------- -------------------------------------------
> -------------
> pop /files1 0 17089120 9965664 58.3 148:35 1117.9 30:39 5418.9
>
> So is 4/19 a level 3 or level 0?
As clearly shown, a level 0 was done. Would you really expect your level 3
incremental, not even a level 1 or 2, to be the same size as you 4/12 level 0?
>
> Also, in the amadmin find, I see that 4/12 has 973 parts, whereas 4/19
> only has 2 parts.
>
> Why the big difference? What could cause such things? and what steps
> should i take to restore this disk?
>
Two pieces or 1000 would be no different.
--
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)
|
