2005/9/14, Jon LaBadie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm beginning to wonder if the reporting is faulty. I.e. the actual > reason some dumpers is idle is not lack of holding space, but some > idle time is mistakenly assigned to the no-hold category. > > I looked briefly at the source to driver.c. That is the only place > I found that the string "no-hold" is used. It seems to me that a > variable holding the reason for an idle dumper is not reset in a > loop in driver.c. Thus, if some time there is a "no-hold" reason, > perhaps the reason stays at "no-hold" for other reasons. > > There might be minor support for my theory if you have one or more > DLEs that specifically invoke the 'holdingdisk no' parameter. For > example, when the partition that contains the holdingdisk is backed > up, often the use of the holdingdisk is prevented by the DLE. > > I'll post a not to the hackers list describing my theory. Maybe > someone who understands the code can confirm or reject it. >
OK Thanks. I do have a single DLE that has the "holding disk no" parameter, and that is my holding disk. I think you MUST specify no-hold if you are backing up the holding disk.