Hello Joshua, Monday, December 03, 2001, 8:23:33 PM, you wrote:
JBL> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001 at 9:56am, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote >> 1) Not all hosts to be backed up have 100M-NICs inside, so while >> dumping them it slows down the connection to 100M-hosts. >> >> (Getting about 10kB/s right now on the 100M-host, thatīs not much ...) JBL> That sounds like a duplex mismatch. Are the 10M boxen on a switch smart JBL> enough to deal with this? Yes thereīs a switch inbetween. Most of those slow boxes are connected via a hub (coax <-> cat5). I monitored switch activity, the nic of the amanda machine negotiates Full Duplex with 100M ... so I did not explicitly lock the nic to 100M. >> 2) I run multiple dumps a day right now because Iīm constantly adding >> new disks and testing parameters. My tapecycle is 11, my dumpcycle 14, >> I have 11 tapes labeled and used them all already, so that they are in >> my tapelist. >> But amanda is still requesting new tapes. >> Is this because I ran multiple dumps per day ? >> How I can I tell her to use DAILY01 after DAILY11 explicitly ? JBL> What is your runspercycle? Tapecycle *must* be >= (preferebably >) JBL> runspercycle. Otherwise, you may be overwriting the *only* full dump of a JBL> filesystem you have on tape. If that happens, you're SOL at restore time. I donīt have runspercycle set. Wrong ? Gonna read about it once more. dumpcycle 14 tapecycle 11 runtapes 1 btw, whatīs SOL ? ;-) thank you, Stefan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
