Hi
Unfortunately the NFS server is a NAS device on which I can not run amanda :-(.
Now if amanda could talk NDMP I could use the tape device on the NAS
server, but I would still need another box to run amanda and the data
would be going in and out of this box. Still that would be better than
in, out and back again :-).
I would think if I had the same config on the tape server as the holding-disk
server up to the tape device, then I could just run amflush on the tape server.
>From: "Bort, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'Anthony Worrall'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: NFS mounted holding disk
>Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:32:03 -0400
>X-Scanner: exiscan *14pt4u-0004vx-00*ccNglIAG/2M*
http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/
>
>Here's a bad idea for you: Install Amanda server on both the NFS server and
>the tape server; Run amdump on the NFS server using whatever configuration
>you'd like, but don't let it dump to tape; use the tape server to back up
>the NFS server at level 0 every time; after the tape server is done, tell
>the NFS server to amflush to /dev/null. It's not pretty, and restores are
>cumbersome, but it would accomplish the mission.
>
>Of course, so would moving the tape drive(s) to the NFS server. Is that a
>possibility?
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Anthony Worrall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:17 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: NFS mounted holding disk
>
>
>
>>To: Anthony Worrall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: NFS mounted holding disk
>>Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 10:51:17 -0400
>>From: Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>X-Scanner: exiscan *14pWpZ-0000BM-00*1pxFlM.Ffuc*
>http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/
>>
>>
>>In a message dated: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 10:42:13 BST
>>Anthony Worrall said:
>>
>>>One reason would be the NFS server has a 1Gb interface and the clients and
>>>tape server have only 100Mb.
>>
>>Okay, so now you're saturating the 100Mb interface on the tape server
>>twice? I still don't see the advantage in this.
>
>That is why I would like the clients to dump directly to the holding disk
>without the data going via the tape server.
>
>Even so give the choice between dumping to an NFS mounted holding disk and
>dumping directly to tape the former seems to be faster.
>
>
>Of course having a big holding disk on the tape server would be even better.
>
>
>>--
>>
>>Seeya,
>>Paul
>>----
>> It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing,
>> but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away.
>>
>> If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
>>
>>
>
>Anthony Worrall
>The University of Reading,
>Department of Computer Science,
>Whiteknights, PO Box 225
>Reading,
>Berkshire, UK
>RG6 6AY
>Tel: +44 (0)1189 318610
>Fax: +44 (0)1189 751994
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anthony Worrall
The University of Reading,
Department of Computer Science,
Whiteknights, PO Box 225
Reading,
Berkshire, UK
RG6 6AY
Tel: +44 (0)1189 318610
Fax: +44 (0)1189 751994
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
