Jon LaBadie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:24:17PM -0500, Dan Debertin wrote: > > One of my client hosts has a drive that is larger than my holding disk > > -- drive is 18G, holdingdisk is only 4G. No, I can't swap them, and > > no, I'd rather not buy a bigger disk right now. > > > > I would have thought that Amanda would dump the client to the > > holdingdisk in 1G chunks (isn't that what the "chunksize" directive is > > for?), as it does the other clients, and then gradually flush those to > > tape, in order to keep the drive streaming. But it's not; it uses the > > holdingdisk for the other clients, and dumps straight to tape with the > > large one. > > > > Is there any way around this behavior? > > I don't believe so. I think the entire fs is dumped to the holding disk > before anything gets sent to tape. If the holding disk is not large > enough to hold the fs, it must go directly to tape. > > The chunksize parameter is generally used to work around the single > file size limit that some os's have.
Hi, On the source level maybe an insane increase to the buffer between the two taper processes could help. That leads to heavy RAM and OS swap space usage on the tape server. Or you could switch from dump to tar and backup subdirectories that each are less than 4 GB. Johannes Nieß
