On Wednesday 27 May 2009, Darin Perusich wrote:
>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.
No drive, or no spare channel?
But I still think you may be using the wrong tool. Amrecover can write the
recovered files anyplace you tell it to, and AFAIK there is no holding disk
involved. If you can cd to this NFS mount point, I believe that amrecover can
write to it also. If its slow, then I guess its slow. AFAIK that should not
kill the restoration. Once you have added the list of files and typed
extract, your only interaction would be inserting the tapes if it cannot find
them in the rack, or in my case, the vtape list. My tape insertion duties
consist of hitting the return key when it asks for the next tape by name. You
would have to insert that tape by hand if it is not in the library already.
--
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)
The NRA is offering FREE Associate memberships to anyone who wants them.
<https://www.nrahq.org/nrabonus/accept-membership.asp>
AUTHOR
FvwmAuto just appeared one day, nobody knows how.
-- FvwmAuto(1x)
|
