--On Tuesday, April 23, 2002 08:52:51 -0400 Joshua Baker-LePain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 at 1:30pm, Toralf Lund wrote > >> Wouldn't append support be easy to implement? Seems to me that most of the >> code must be there already (since Amanda writes several dumps to one tape >> in its normal mode of operation.) >> > Lack of append support is a design decision, AIUI. The thought is that > it's better to not use some of a tape than to overwrite backups because, > for some reason, the tape rewound itself when you weren't looking. Safety > and redundancy are paramount in backups, not tape usage. YMMV, but that's > the design decision made with amanda (which I happen to agree with). > > If you want to fill tapes to the max, then add the disk usages up by hand > and 'amadmin force' enough filesystems each night to fill the tape. Or leave the tape out of the drive and let it go to to the holding disk, then amflush whenever you have a full tapes worth. As someone who has learned a lot the hard way, I concur with the 'no append' design decision. There is no way to redo a previous backup, and the one time you accidently overwrite a tape will be the time you most need a file that only existed on that tape. Power glitches, I/O errors, SCSI resets, other users, and various other things can easily cause a drive to rewind with your noticing, and they would all be fatal to your data. Frank -- Frank Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673 Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501
