In regard to: Re: [Networker] Volume capacity?, A Darren Dunham said (at...:

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 05:04:58PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:

In regard to: Re: [Networker] Volume capacity?, George Sinclair said (at...:

Well, one reason would be that if on average you're getting 2:1
compression then NW will report the tape at 100% when it's only
written,  say, half of what it will end up writing, right?

That's true, but I guess I don't consider that a useful reason to change
the default volume capacity.

The only thing the capacity figure is for is reporting, so what would be
a more useful reason to change it?

Perhaps you and George are right, and I should be updating the default
volume capacity, since we too use device compression.  This may be one
more instance of "old habits" that should be revisited to see if it
still makes sense for my environment.

Your point about a volume being "full" no matter what % of the default
capacity was used is also salient.  I have this vague recollection that
there used to be an easy way to detect tapes that had bad spots on the
media (and therefore became full prematurely) using either the old green
GUI or some other obvious method, but perhaps not.  In any case, it
doesn't matter -- the way the product works now, it probably is worth
considering updating the default capacity if hardware compression is in
the mix.

Tim
--
Tim Mooney                                             Tim.Mooney AT ndsu DOT 
edu
Enterprise Computing & Infrastructure                  701-231-1076 (Voice)
Room 242-J6, IACC Building                             701-231-8541 (Fax)
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type 
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to networker-request 
AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this list. You can access the 
archives at http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER