Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Darin Perusich wrote:
>> Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Darin Perusich
>>>
>>> <Darin.Perusich AT cognigencorp DOT com> wrote:
>>>> Why does 'amrestore' always rewind the tape when I go to restore
>>>> something? This is something I just started seeing after upgrading to
>>>> 2.6.x, it wasn't happening with previous versions, 2.5.2. The man page
>>>> says I can use '-f #' to fast forward the tape to a specific mark but
>>>> when I've already done this or I want to say back it up a few marks to
>>>> restore something else, or start another restore beginning at the
>>>> current mark it's really a waste of time having to wait for the rewind
>>>> and the ran back down the tape to retrieve the image.
>>> Amanda no longer relies on the no-rewind tape device, and always
>>> positions the tape itself.
>> Being able to specify with an argument, -n or whatever, to not rewind
>> the tape would be convenient, a time saver, and make for more efficient
>> recovery I would think.
>>
>>> You may want to consider using a single amrestore invocation to get
>>> the data you need, or using amrecover.
>> The amount of data I'm attempting to restore is larger then the
>> available holding disk space so using a single invocation or amrecover
>> isn't an option.
>
> Since amrecover can, if you are sure of what you are doing, directly
> overwrite
> the stuff you are trying to restore, I am not seeing the connection between
> amrecover and the holding disk's size. Is my picture incomplete?
I'm restoring about 700gb of images for a bare metal restore and the
hold disk is around 500gb so after I restoring a portion of the images
I'm moving them to an nfs mount to free up space so I can continue
pulling the images from tape. When I initiate the amrestore it rewinds
the tape instead of just starting off at the current tape mark so I
can't just do 'amrestore ... server-name', I need to list out which
images to pull. Before 2.6.x I could just start the amrestore again and
it would pick up where I left off. Using the '-f #' option would be
nearly as convenient but it's not working, I posted another messages
about that already.
> Something else, how hard would it be to add another disk temporarily and spec
> it as a holding disk, it could be mounted right on top of the /dumps
> directory. It wouldn't be the first time I've had temporary drives hanging
> out of a 44" tower, propped up on a cardboard box if need be to make cables
> fit. :)
>
I'm not able to do add any additional disk to this server unfortunately
and restoring to an nfs mount is just too slow.
--
Darin Perusich
Unix Systems Administrator
Cognigen Corporation
395 Youngs Rd.
Williamsville, NY 14221
Phone: 716-633-3463
Email: darinper AT cognigencorp DOT com
|
