On 9/24/12 9:57 AM, bingo wrote:
> This could just be a programmer's typo when appending the size string to the 
> calculated number in the savegroup report

If that were the case, I'd expect all the sizes to be off by that same factor 
and not just this
one save set's size.

>
> But i am worried about the procedure.
>   - Why do you use nsradmin to check a save set information?

I use nsradmin to monitor it (hence the "show session" limitation of what is 
printed) while the
save group is running when I do not have ready access to NMC.

>   - Why don't you use mminfo instead?

Because I don't want to while the save group is running.

>
> On the other hand, the backup duration should at least show a significant 
> difference when backing up 2GB vs. 2TB ;-)

Yes, the backup duration is of sufficient length (53 hours) that it should have 
been 2TB.

Still,  you haven't addressed the question I asked in all your picking at my 
methodology.

Would sparse files account for this discrepancy in reported sizes?