>Wait - are you saying that I don't have to re-label each of my tapes?

That's what I'm saying.  I've been telling you all along you're working
too hard at this :-) :-).

Here's the short version:

  * Set tapecycle in amanda.conf to the number of tapes you actually
    have (four, right?).  Don't lie to it :-).

  * Run amlabel on them **once** to write the initial label, e.g. daily0,
    daily1, daily2, daily3.  You might want to use two digits (daily00) on
    the off chance you actually get a reasonable amount of tapes someday.
    If you've got good data, wait until you need the tape to run amlabel.

  * Remove your tapelist file.  It's probably pretty confused by now.

  * Let Amanda tell you what tape it wants.  For the first time
    through, it will say it wants "a new tape".  Give it the next tape in
    the sequence (i.e. daily0 first, then daily1, and so on).

That's it.  Once you get through the tapes the first time, Amanda will
just tell you explicitly what it wants.

>***Example: I have tape daily555 in the tape drive right now.
>
>When I run amadmin <conf> tape I get these results: 
>
>***********************************************************
>
>amanda@sundev1 [daily] % amadmin daily tape
>The next Amanda run should go onto a new tape.

That's because you have tapecycle set larger than the number of entries
in your tapelist file.  It does not actually look at the tape.

>*Example: When I run amcheck - Amanda tells me it
>will not overwrite tape daily555

That's because daily555 is listed in your tapelist file but because you
have not used "tapecycle" tapes yet, it is going to insist on a new tape.

>This is why I have been re-labeling the tapes each time. After I force the
>re-label
>of a tape amflush runs without fail.  ...

That's because the tape then looks "new".  But you're really confusing
Amanda about where things are.

>I never thought that made any sense - but I guess Amanda doesn't want to
>overwrite good Valid images.

It tries very, very, very hard not to do that.

>Denise E. Ives

John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to