I am having a problem with amdump. It says it expects a new tape . I get the same reply if run amdump or amcheck. I am doing amdump for 5 days with 5 tapes and will change the tape the alst tape for every alternat week. So I have runspercycle as 7. I have attached the amanda.conf and tapelist and disklist. I would appreciate if someone could help me with
The explanation is confusing, and the typo's don't help either :-)
What I understand from above is:
- dumpcycle 1 week (assumed, but you dumptype overrides this) - runspercycle 7 ("I have runspercycle as 7") - tapecycle 5 ("with 5 tapes") or - dumpcycle 1 week (assumed, but your dumptype overrides this) - runspercycle 5 ("amdump for 5 days") - tapecycle 7 ("will change the tape the alst tape for - every alternate week" meaning: - change only the last tape (of a set of 6): - Reuse the other 5 tapes each week, and tape 6 and 7 - every alternate week? - This can be done with "tapecycle 7"; you need two - separate configs for this, or lie about tapecycle.
In amanda.conf:
> tapedev "/dev/st0"
That should be the non-rewinding device "/dev/nst0".
> dumpcycle 1 weeks > runspercycle 5 weeks > tapecycle 7 tapes
runspercycle does not have a unit, and specifying "weeks" is like multiplying by 7. So you actually have "runspercycle 35". Probably not what you want.
> holdingdisk hd1 { > comment "main holding disk" > directory "/home/amanda" > use 1 Gb > chunksize 1 Gb > }
This could be correct, but I believe that chunksize actually does not include the 32K amanda header, resulting in 1GB+32K files on disk. (That's why many amanda users specify 2000M instead of 2GByte on filesystems where the maximum filesize is 2 Gbyte). I did not verify this in the current sources. Thus specifing "use 1Gb" at the same time could be in conflict with the 1GB+32K chunks. I would avoid this boundary condition, and specify a "use -500 MB" or suitable number. Also your holdingdisk usage of 1 GByte is riduculously small compared to the tapecapacity of 80 Gbyte. I guess the holdingdisk is bypassed completely, given you do always-full backups of only two (large?) DLE's. Given you only backup 2 DLE's with "compression fast", and you have a very fast CPU, bypassing the holdingdisk could be on purpose, I guess.
-- Paul Bijnens, Xplanation Tel +32 16 397.511 Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUM Fax +32 16 397.512 http://www.xplanation.com/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *********************************************************************** * I think I've got the hang of it now: exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, F6, * * quit, ZZ, :q, :q!, M-Z, ^X^C, logoff, logout, close, bye, /bye, * * stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt, abort, hangup, * * PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e, kill -1 $$, shutdown, * * kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... * * ... "Are you sure?" ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out * ***********************************************************************