Amanda-Users

Re: [Amanda-users] How to read and interpret completed job emails from Amanda

2008-10-30 04:04:56
Subject: Re: [Amanda-users] How to read and interpret completed job emails from Amanda
From: Marc Muehlfeld <Marc.Muehlfeld AT medizinische-genetik DOT de>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:59:16 +0100
g00f schrieb:

> Tape Size (meg)        1446225.1   1446225.1        0.0
Here is where it gets fuzzy... and not in logic. Tape size... the
> amount that was put to tape?

Yes.



> Tape Used... 359%?

Habe a look at your tapetype definition. There is a length of the tape defined, and I'm sure it doesn't be the correct value for your tape. Amanda writes to the tape until it's full and when the length value is smaller than the real one, you get unrealistic values here.

http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Tapetype_definitions
# man amtapetype



> Avg Tp Write Rate (k/s) 57752.5    57752.5        --
Avg Tp Write Rate, the holding disk wrote to the tape drive @
> 57MB/s....correct?

Not the holdingdisk writes to tape. Amanda reads from the holding disk and flushes the data to tape with the shown speed.



How did my Tapes load more then their capacity of 360GB
> each (LTO3 @ 400GB native capacity - 40GB tape split size).

Have a look at the wiki link for tapetype definitions. You can use one of them, if you find your changer there. Or you can create your own for better values. If you create a own for your hardware, please share it on the wiki or send it to the list (someone will add it then).



  taper: Will request retry of failed split part.

I cant tell if this is an error or just for my information, I assume
> it caused by the Tape Split Size value we use.

I have no idea on this message. But it seams to be an information. If something wasn't done successfully, you would see an "FAILED" in the summary like
genome.mr.lfmg.de  /tmp  lev 0  FAILED "[disk /tmp, all estimate timed out]"



archive2.win -TS/033x010 0 722933590 722933590    --   198:16 60769.8 241:30 
49893.5
archive2.win -S/148Ax050 0 758000870 758000870    --   346:00 36512.1 185:53 
67962.4

And finally this final output which tells me that bandwidth was different for
> the 2 FS's , why would one throughput be higher then the other one.

Maybe there was some load on the server because of different services on the first filesystem. Or maybe if you have configured to run two dump processes on the server at the same time, maybe one was finished earlier so the second could run faster after that time.


Regards
Marc

--
Marc Muehlfeld (Leitung IT)
Zentrum fuer Humangenetik und Laboratoriumsmedizin Dr. Klein und Dr. Rost
Lochhamer Str. 29 - D-82152 Martinsried
Telefon: +49(0)89/895578-0 - Fax: +49(0)89/895578-78
http://www.medizinische-genetik.de