Re: DDS-3 tapetype ???
--On Thursday, June 16, 2005 23:59:28 -0500 Michael D Schleif <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Earlier this year, my HP DAT tape drive had problems, and I replaced it
> with a Compaq/Sony SDT-9000. Mostly, I am still using the same DDS-3
> tapes that I was using, and retired some and added some. My old records
> show that I was getting nearly the full 12GB uncompressed tape length.
>
> Since the tape drive change, I have wondered why I didn't seem to be
> getting all the data on some tapes. Clearly, with Amanda, some days it
> just doesn't want to send a full 12GB to tape; but, mostly, I have been
> seeing <9GB going to tape, and balance sitting in holdingdisk.
>
> Today, I did this:
>
> # time sudo -u backup amtapetype -e 12g -f /dev/nst0 -o
> Writing 32 Mbyte compresseable data: 37 sec
> Writing 32 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 35 sec
> Estimated time to write 2 * 12288 Mbyte: 26880 sec = 7 h 28 min
> wrote 298832 32Kb blocks in 76 files in 10632 seconds (short write)
> wrote 310628 32Kb blocks in 158 files in 10840 seconds (short write)
> define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
> comment "just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression
> off)"
> length 9522 mbytes
> filemark 0 kbytes
> speed 908 kps
> }
>
> real364m39.451s
> user0m2.724s
> sys 0m28.719s
>
>
> What is going on here?
>
> How can I get a full 12GB tape length?
>
> What do you think?
Are you positive hardware compression is off? You might want to look into
Gene's frequent postings about disabling compression when tapes have
previously been written compressed.
Are you actually hitting EOT on your backups, or is it just the result
of your tapetype setting the length to 9.5GB? If you're not already
hitting EOT, try changing the length in your tapetype to 12GB and see
if more is written.
Frank
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> mds
> mds resource
> 877.596.8237
> -
> Dare to fix things before they break . . .
> -
> Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much
> we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .
> --
--
Frank Smith[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sr. Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673
Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501
Re: Strange dump details
--On Thursday, June 16, 2005 20:13:41 -0400 Jon LaBadie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Backup programs like dump, tar, smbclient generate lots of > messages that are informational fluff. Amanda has hard coded > lists of things to "not worry about". Others amanda knows > to print error reports about. > > When one of the programs changes its fluff, sometimes even > simple spacing changes, amanda may recognize the message as > one to report as an error or ignore. These get reported as > "strange". > > Some future version of amanda will have adjusted for the > samba changes. > Are there any plans to allow additional ignore patterns to be specified in the amanda.conf file so that they could be filtered out on the server side so as not to be reported as strange? Editing source code and recompiling seems like overkill. Frank -- Frank Smith[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673 Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501
DDS-3 tapetype ???
Earlier this year, my HP DAT tape drive had problems, and I replaced it
with a Compaq/Sony SDT-9000. Mostly, I am still using the same DDS-3
tapes that I was using, and retired some and added some. My old records
show that I was getting nearly the full 12GB uncompressed tape length.
Since the tape drive change, I have wondered why I didn't seem to be
getting all the data on some tapes. Clearly, with Amanda, some days it
just doesn't want to send a full 12GB to tape; but, mostly, I have been
seeing <9GB going to tape, and balance sitting in holdingdisk.
Today, I did this:
# time sudo -u backup amtapetype -e 12g -f /dev/nst0 -o
Writing 32 Mbyte compresseable data: 37 sec
Writing 32 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 35 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 12288 Mbyte: 26880 sec = 7 h 28 min
wrote 298832 32Kb blocks in 76 files in 10632 seconds (short write)
wrote 310628 32Kb blocks in 158 files in 10840 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment "just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)"
length 9522 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 908 kps
}
real364m39.451s
user0m2.724s
sys 0m28.719s
What is going on here?
How can I get a full 12GB tape length?
What do you think?
--
Best Regards,
mds
mds resource
877.596.8237
-
Dare to fix things before they break . . .
-
Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much
we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [dump larger than tape, 2866960 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk]
Chuck Amadi Systems Administrator wrote: #disklist file #server.domain.co.uk / comp-root-tar #Thought I was using tar. and I get the above error. Whats the best to tackle this still using DSS-4 150mm DAT tapes. and how to cannot incremental dump new disk as above error. Thus can I change from dump to tar I think you already are using tar, if you haven't modified the comp-root-tar dumptype yourself. Amanda still refers to the process of backing up and resulting image as 'dump', she won't say 'tar larger than tape' when you're using tar :-) --- ... Coffee -- n., a person who is coughed upon.
Re: Strange dump details
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 11:26:53PM +0200, Nicklas Bondesson wrote: > I'm using amanda 2.4.5 to backup some Windows shares using amanda and > smbclient. > > Everything went just fine until I upgraded Debian to the lastest stable > (3.1). This upgrade went from Samba 2.2.3a to 3.0.14a. > > I now get this type of message on all of my Windows shares that I back up > from amanda. > > FAILED AND STRANGE DUMP DETAILS: > > /-- ibiza //host/chare lev 0 STRANGE > sendbackup: start [bakupserver://host/share level 0] > sendbackup: info BACKUP=/usr/bin/smbclient > sendbackup: info RECOVER_CMD=/usr/bin/smbclient -f... - > sendbackup: info end > ? Domain=[DOMAIN] OS=[Windows 5.1] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager] > | tar: dumped 16 files and directories > | Total bytes written: 3689984 > sendbackup: size 3604 > sendbackup: end > \ Backup programs like dump, tar, smbclient generate lots of messages that are informational fluff. Amanda has hard coded lists of things to "not worry about". Others amanda knows to print error reports about. When one of the programs changes its fluff, sometimes even simple spacing changes, amanda may recognize the message as one to report as an error or ignore. These get reported as "strange". Some future version of amanda will have adjusted for the samba changes. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: Strange dump details
Hello, Nicklas, on 16.06.2005, 23:26 you wrote to amanda-users@amanda.org: > ? Domain=[DOMAIN] OS=[Windows 5.1] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager] > Any ideas? Ignore it (it's not a problem) or browse the archives of this list for a patch that has been recently posted. Best regards, Stefan G. Weichinger. mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Backup to Hard Drive
On Thursday 16 June 2005 17:50, Mike Delaney wrote: >On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 02:24:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:52, Cody Holland wrote: >> >I'm a newb to Amanda, and would like to backup everything to a >> > server running Raid0. I'm sure this is very possible, I just >> > cannot find any docs on it. Any help would be greatly >> > appreciated. >> >> However, under recovery situations where you may be doing a bare >> metal rebuild, I'd be a bit spooked of a raid as there is a >> possibility under those total disaster conditions, that the raid >> may not be available without a lot of pre-configuring of the md >> driver. > >I'd be more worried about using a RAID-0 device to store my backups: >loose any one disk and the volume is toast, and each disk in the > stripe increases the likelyhood of a failure. Compared to that, > having to configure a software RAID driver to access a pre-existing > volume when rebuilding the OS on the server is a mere annoyance. Humm, I didn't notice the raid0 above. Yup, thats a disaster looking for a place to happen, so I'll second the antiraid(0 at least) sentiments. Definitely a bad dog, no bisquit scenario. As it is, if I lose that $120 commodity drive, I've lost my /var partition and all my backups. But a 2 hour drive to Circuit City for another (probably even bigger than 200GB), 20 minutes to install it, 10 minutes to fdisk it & mke3fs it, a run of my script to re-create the amandatapes partitions contents, and I'm back in business after a 4 day dumpcycle to get fulls of everything again. I could even reassign /var to another smaller unused partition on hda temporarily and continue while I'm driving that 70 mile round trip to get the other drives replacement. I'd moved /var to a seperate spindle because I once had a write error that made the whole disk read-only (bleeding edge kernel early in the 2.6 series). The error couldn't be logged, so it was a chicken and egg situation. Moving /var is hopefully insurance against a repeat of that scenario. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: Backup to Hard Drive
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 02:24:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:52, Cody Holland wrote: > >I'm a newb to Amanda, and would like to backup everything to a > > server running Raid0. I'm sure this is very possible, I just > > cannot find any docs on it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > However, under recovery situations where you may be doing a bare metal > rebuild, I'd be a bit spooked of a raid as there is a possibility > under those total disaster conditions, that the raid may not be > available without a lot of pre-configuring of the md driver. I'd be more worried about using a RAID-0 device to store my backups: loose any one disk and the volume is toast, and each disk in the stripe increases the likelyhood of a failure. Compared to that, having to configure a software RAID driver to access a pre-existing volume when rebuilding the OS on the server is a mere annoyance.
RE: dumper5 pid 10813 is messed up, ignoring it
> Hello, Rebecca, > > on 16.06.2005, 19:47 you wrote to amanda-users@amanda.org: > > > Here's what I have: A server running amanda-2.4.4p4 running on RHE3 > > intel, and has been for a couple of years. A client running > > amanda-2.4.4p1 on Sol9, sparc. > > > Any suggestions? > > Is there any reasonable chance of getting some more recent > version of AMANDA running on that client? > > 2.4.4p1 is pretty old now, there have been loads of changes > and fixes since then ... > > Rolling your new and shiny AMANDA-client shouldn't take you > longer than debugging the old one with gdb ... > > Best regards, > Stefan G. Weichinger. Yeah, I thought about that, but if that were the problem, wouldn't it be happening on my other 2.4.4p1 clients? I'm looking for a little bit more information on what the problem could possibly be. What causes the dumper to tank all of a sudden? If there's something else failing on this box, I'd kind of like to know.
Strange dump details
I'm using amanda 2.4.5 to backup some Windows shares using amanda and smbclient. Everything went just fine until I upgraded Debian to the lastest stable (3.1). This upgrade went from Samba 2.2.3a to 3.0.14a. I now get this type of message on all of my Windows shares that I back up from amanda. FAILED AND STRANGE DUMP DETAILS: /-- ibiza //host/chare lev 0 STRANGE sendbackup: start [bakupserver://host/share level 0] sendbackup: info BACKUP=/usr/bin/smbclient sendbackup: info RECOVER_CMD=/usr/bin/smbclient -f... - sendbackup: info end ? Domain=[DOMAIN] OS=[Windows 5.1] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager] | tar: dumped 16 files and directories | Total bytes written: 3689984 sendbackup: size 3604 sendbackup: end \ Any ideas? Thanks, Nicklas
[no subject]
I'm using amanda 2.4.5 to backup some Windows shares using amanda and smbclient. Everything went just fine until I upgraded Debian to the lastest stable (3.1). This upgrade went from Samba 2.2.3a to 3.0.14a. I now get this type of message on all of my Windows shares that I back up from amanda. FAILED AND STRANGE DUMP DETAILS: /-- ibiza //host/chare lev 0 STRANGE sendbackup: start [bakupserver://host/share level 0] sendbackup: info BACKUP=/usr/bin/smbclient sendbackup: info RECOVER_CMD=/usr/bin/smbclient -f... - sendbackup: info end ? Domain=[DOMAIN] OS=[Windows 5.1] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager] | tar: dumped 16 files and directories | Total bytes written: 3689984 sendbackup: size 3604 sendbackup: end \ Any ideas? Thanks, Nicklas
Re: dumper5 pid 10813 is messed up, ignoring it
Hello, Rebecca, on 16.06.2005, 19:47 you wrote to amanda-users@amanda.org: > Here's what I have: A server running amanda-2.4.4p4 running on RHE3 > intel, and has been for a couple of years. A client running > amanda-2.4.4p1 on Sol9, sparc. > Any suggestions? Is there any reasonable chance of getting some more recent version of AMANDA running on that client? 2.4.4p1 is pretty old now, there have been loads of changes and fixes since then ... Rolling your new and shiny AMANDA-client shouldn't take you longer than debugging the old one with gdb ... Best regards, Stefan G. Weichinger. mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re[2]: Backup to Hard Drive
Hello, Rebecca, on 16.06.2005, 21:22 you wrote to amanda-users@amanda.org: > Try looking in the amanda FAQ-omatic, here: > http://amanda.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/fom?_recurse=1&file=25#file_191 > This is the configuration I used and it works like a champ. ;-) And something more up-to-date: http://www.amanda.org/docs/howto-filedriver.html (I know this is hard to find as it is "hidden" right in the middle of the AMANDA-docs ;-) ) Best regards, Stefan G. Weichinger. mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Backup to Hard Drive
> On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:52, Cody Holland wrote: > >I'm a newb to Amanda, and would like to backup everything to > a server > >running Raid0. I'm sure this is very possible, I just > cannot find any > >docs on it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > > >Thanks, > >Cody Try looking in the amanda FAQ-omatic, here: http://amanda.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/fom?_recurse=1&file=25#file_191 This is the configuration I used and it works like a champ. ;-)
Re: Backup to Hard Drive
On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:52, Cody Holland wrote: >I'm a newb to Amanda, and would like to backup everything to a > server running Raid0. I'm sure this is very possible, I just > cannot find any docs on it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks, >Cody See the FILE: tapetype in the docs When its all setup, your directory will have a subdir for each of the 'virtual tapes' you've configured it for, and a link to the currently active directory called 'data'. Works pretty slick, I've been doing it for about a year now to a 180GB partition on a single 200GB commodity grade disk. If the raid looks normal to an 'ls' listing, then amanda won't know, or care that its a raid. However, under recovery situations where you may be doing a bare metal rebuild, I'd be a bit spooked of a raid as there is a possibility under those total disaster conditions, that the raid may not be available without a lot of pre-configuring of the md driver. /dev/hdd3 will always be available for the mounting of it someplace suitable in a rescue situation. However, thats just me being ny usual paranoid :-) -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
dumper5 pid 10813 is messed up, ignoring it
Title: dumper5 pid 10813 is messed up, ignoring it Hi all - I've searched the archives and did a google search on the above error, and I found an old sourceforge archive from JJ that offered some suggestions, but I still can't get a handle on what's going on. Here's what I have: A server running amanda-2.4.4p4 running on RHE3 intel, and has been for a couple of years. A client running amanda-2.4.4p1 on Sol9, sparc. Here's what's happening: I've isolated the problem to this client because it's the only one where all of the results are missing, well almost all. I changed my disklist to include only this client since all others are backing up just fine. Basically the job just hangs and hangs and hangs, so I come in and manually kill dumper0-dumper5 and then the taper pid's go away, too…then I finally get the email from amanda: *** THE DUMPS DID NOT FINISH PROPERLY! Ignore this - I didn't have a tape in the drive at the time I was trying this test…same with taper stats below*** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [rewinding tape: Input/output error]. Some dumps may have been left in the holding disk. Run amflush to flush them to tape. The next tape Amanda expects to use is: uadaily02. FAILURE AND STRANGE DUMP SUMMARY: smores.unt /usr RESULTS MISSING smores.unt /opt RESULTS MISSING smores.unt /export/home RESULTS MISSING smores.unt /var RESULTS MISSING STATISTICS: Total Full Daily Estimate Time (hrs:min) 0:01 Run Time (hrs:min) 0:01 Dump Time (hrs:min) 0:01 0:01 0:00 Output Size (meg) 2.3 2.3 0.0 Original Size (meg) 2.3 2.3 0.0 Avg Compressed Size (%) -- -- -- Filesystems Dumped 1 1 0 Avg Dump Rate (k/s) 45.0 45.0 -- Tape Time (hrs:min) 0:00 0:00 0:00 Tape Size (meg) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tape Used (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filesystems Taped 0 0 0 Avg Tp Write Rate (k/s) -- -- -- NOTES: driver: dumper5 pid 10813 is messed up, ignoring it. driver: dumper0 pid 10808 is messed up, ignoring it. driver: dumper0 died while dumping smores.unterlaw.com:/export/home lev 0. DUMP SUMMARY: DUMPER STATS TAPER STATS HOSTNAME DISK L ORIG-KB OUT-KB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s MMM:SS KB/s --- -- smores.u /etc 0 2360 2360 -- 0:52 45.0 N/A N/A smores.u /export/home MISSING -- smores.u /opt MISSING -- smores.u /usr MISSING -- smores.u /var MISSING -- (brought to you by Amanda version 2.4.4p4) According the email a couple of years ago from JJ, I tried to run the amdump on just this client, while running gdb in another window on the dumper pid. I've never used gdb before, but basically it just gave me a bunch of library connection stuff and then sat there after I typed "cont" at the prompt. Any suggestions?
Re: dump larger than tape, 2862305 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk
Chuck Amadi Systems Administrator wrote:
I got the culprit
define tapetype HP-DAT {
comment "DAT tape drives"
# data provided by Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
length 1930 mbytes
filemark 111 kbytes
speed 468 kbytes
I will edit this bugger.
Actually it is more or less correct: an HP-DAT is a DDS-1,
in the thime when there was no DDS-2, DDS-3 or DDS-4.
You better add you own define for a DDS-4
and then set tapetype to that new type.
--
Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel +32 16 397.511
Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax +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 $$, shutdown, *
* init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... *
* ... "Are you sure?" ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out *
***
Re: out-of-tape on dump errors
Mike Brodbelt wrote: Peter Mueller wrote: As I understand it, Amanda interpretes any non-ok result from the tape device as "out of tape" - as most backup and tape handling software does. That filesystem has since backed up successfully, so I'm writing it down to just a glitch in this case. Thanks for the above though, I hadn't actually realised that out-of-tape was Amanda's catch-all. Not only amanda, it the OS's catch-all. When writing, the end of a tape is not noticed when you have a "permanent" write error on that place. When reading, there could be a difference: a permanent crc check failure is different than reading not enough bytes. But a broken tape would be handled exactly the same when reading too. -- Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel +32 16 397.511 Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax +32 16 397.512 http://www.xplanation.com/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** * I think I've got the hang of it now: exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, F6, * * quit, ZZ, :q, :q!, M-Z, ^X^C, logoff, logout, close, bye, /bye, * * stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt, abort, hangup, * * PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e, kill -1 $$, shutdown, * * init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... * * ... "Are you sure?" ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out * ***
Backup to Hard Drive
I'm a newb to Amanda, and would like to backup everything to a server running Raid0. I'm sure this is very possible, I just cannot find any docs on it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Cody
2.5.5 question
I just upgraded from 2.4.4p3-2 to 2.5.0 (I need to use calsize to handle a Network Appliance filer). My short test backup worked fine, but when I ran my usual backup last night, amanda skipped more than half my DLE's because it thought it didn't have room on the tape. It failed for some of the DLE's that use calcsize but also for my old "normal" tar based DLE's, and what's more, a bunch of the skipped entries are tiny, like 1KB. I have a SDLT320 tape drive and amanda reports only 37% of the tape used, so it appears that something is really wrong. I used my old amanda.conf with the addition of creating a new dumptype to use calcsize as the only change. I'm gonna go through the debug files in detail next. If anyone has any ideas I'd sure like to hear them. thanks -- George Kelbley System Support Group Computer Science Department University of New Mexico 505-277-6502Fax: 505-277-6927
Re: out-of-tape on dump errors
Peter Mueller wrote: >>Does anyone now why Amanda might generate an out of tape error in a >>situation where it blatantly isn't anywhere even close to the end of the >>tape? >> > > As I understand it, Amanda interpretes any non-ok result from the tape > device as "out of tape" - as most backup and tape handling software does. That filesystem has since backed up successfully, so I'm writing it down to just a glitch in this case. Thanks for the above though, I hadn't actually realised that out-of-tape was Amanda's catch-all. Mike.
Re: R: dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump newdisk
On Thursday 16 June 2005 08:28, Chuck Amadi Systems Administrator wrote: >Hi just posted it Where? It didn't make it to here so we can verify what you have. >When I first configured I did rub the command that took for ever and > a day. > >But I did have a 20gb tape in the drive. Two things Chuck: 1) did you transfer the results into a new tapetype verse in your amanda.conf? 2) Is the '?' key broken on your keyboard? We are infering from the words that you are asking a question, but it would be nicer if it was properly marked. >Cheers > >Is there a way to reset it as I have edited the > >On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 14:20 +0200, Montagni, Giovanni wrote: >> Have you ever run amtapetype command? it seems amanda doesn't >> recognize entire tape lenght... >> >> could paste us your tape definition? >> >> another stupid thing, is the tape rewinded? >> >> Giovanni >> >> -Messaggio originale- >> Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] conto di Chuck Amadi >> Systems Administrator >> Inviato: giovedì 16 giugno 2005 14.03 >> A: Amanda List >> Oggetto: dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental >> dump newdisk >> >> >> >> Hi I have tried backing up "/" using the disklist >> with a 20GB DDS-4 150MM DAT tape and I get this error below. >> The size is only 3GB >> >> Is there a level I need to adjust in the amanda.conf file. >> >> sever.domain.co.uk:/ 0 planner: [dump larger than tape, 2867765 >> KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk] >> >> Cheers -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: dump larger than tape, 2862305 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk
Chuck Amadi Systems Administrator wrote: DELAYING DUMPS IF NEEDED, total_size 2862734, tape length 1976320 mark Somewhere in your configuration you have a tape length of 1976320 KB == 1930 MB instead of 20gb. Search for 1930 or 1976320 in amanda.conf to see it is defined. Or post the amanda.conf. -- Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel +32 16 397.511 Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax +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, * * init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... * * ... "Are you sure?" ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out * ***
Re: R: dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump newdisk
Hi just posted it When I first configured I did rub the command that took for ever and a day. But I did have a 20gb tape in the drive. Cheers Is there a way to reset it as I have edited the On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 14:20 +0200, Montagni, Giovanni wrote: > Have you ever run amtapetype command? it seems amanda doesn't recognize > entire tape lenght... > > could paste us your tape definition? > > another stupid thing, is the tape rewinded? > > Giovanni > > -Messaggio originale- > Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] conto di Chuck Amadi Systems > Administrator > Inviato: giovedì 16 giugno 2005 14.03 > A: Amanda List > Oggetto: dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump > newdisk > > > > Hi I have tried backing up "/" using the disklist > with a 20GB DDS-4 150MM DAT tape and I get this error below. > The size is only 3GB > > Is there a level I need to adjust in the amanda.conf file. > > sever.domain.co.uk:/ 0 planner: [dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but > cannot incremental dump new disk] > > Cheers > -- Unix/ Linux Systems Administrator Chuck Amadi The Surgical Material Testing Laboratory (SMTL), Princess of Wales Hospital Coity Road Bridgend, United Kingdom, CF31 1RQ. Email chuck.smtl.co.uk Tel: +44 1656 752820 Fax: +44 1656 752830
Re: dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk
Chuck Amadi Systems Administrator schrieb: Hi I have tried backing up "/" using the disklist with a 20GB DDS-4 150MM DAT tape and I get this error below. The size is only 3GB Is there a level I need to adjust in the amanda.conf file. Um, perhaps the tapesize parameter? Christoph sever.domain.co.uk:/ 0 planner: [dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk] Cheers
dump larger than tape, 2862305 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk
Hi agian Here is my /var/lib/amanda/amdump.1 ANALYZING ESTIMATES... pondering server.domian.co.uk:/... next_level0 -12951 last_level -1 (due for level 0) (new disk, can't switch to degraded mode) curr level 0 size 2862305 total size 2862734 total_lev0 2862305 balanced-lev0size 2862305 INITIAL SCHEDULE (size 2862734): server.domain.co.uk / pri 12951 lev 0 size 2862305 DELAYING DUMPS IF NEEDED, total_size 2862734, tape length 1976320 mark 111 planner: FAILED server.smtl.co.uk / 20050616 0 [dump larger than tape, 2862305 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk] delay: Total size now 286. Any Ideas as I am using a 20GB dat tape. -- Unix/ Linux Systems Administrator Chuck Amadi The Surgical Material Testing Laboratory (SMTL), Princess of Wales Hospital Coity Road Bridgend, United Kingdom, CF31 1RQ. Email chuck.smtl.co.uk Tel: +44 1656 752820 Fax: +44 1656 752830
dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk
Hi I have tried backing up "/" using the disklist with a 20GB DDS-4 150MM DAT tape and I get this error below. The size is only 3GB Is there a level I need to adjust in the amanda.conf file. sever.domain.co.uk:/ 0 planner: [dump larger than tape, 2867765 KB, but cannot incremental dump new disk] Cheers -- Unix/ Linux Systems Administrator Chuck Amadi The Surgical Material Testing Laboratory (SMTL), Princess of Wales Hospital Coity Road Bridgend, United Kingdom, CF31 1RQ. Email chuck.smtl.co.uk Tel: +44 1656 752820 Fax: +44 1656 752830
Re: Amanda Statistics.
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Erik P. Olsen wrote:
Below the statistics from my last backup. I assume the times are all
elapsed times, but why is amanda so wrong in estimating the times? Or is
it a bug?
STATISTICS:
Total Full Daily
Estimate Time (hrs:min)0:03
Run Time (hrs:min) 1:11
Dump Time (hrs:min)0:51 0:51 0:01
Output Size (meg)7692.4 7648.9 43.5
Original Size (meg) 11996.711886.5 110.2
Avg Compressed Size (%)64.1 64.4 39.4
(level:#disks ...)
Filesystems Dumped7 2 5 (1:5)
Avg Dump Rate (k/s) 2559.5 2584.4 950.4
Tape Time (hrs:min)0:49 0:49 0:00
0:03 is not the estimated time for the run, it's how long it took to
perform the estimate phase of the run.
-Mitch
Re: Amanda Statistics.
Erik P. Olsen schrieb:
Hi,
Below the statistics from my last backup. I assume the times are all
elapsed times, but why is amanda so wrong in estimating the times? Or is
it a bug?
STATISTICS:
Total Full Daily
Estimate Time (hrs:min)0:03
Run Time (hrs:min) 1:11
Dump Time (hrs:min)0:51 0:51 0:01
Output Size (meg)7692.4 7648.9 43.5
Original Size (meg) 11996.711886.5 110.2
Avg Compressed Size (%)64.1 64.4 39.4
(level:#disks ...)
Filesystems Dumped7 2 5 (1:5)
Avg Dump Rate (k/s) 2559.5 2584.4 950.4
Tape Time (hrs:min)0:49 0:49 0:00
Errm,
"Estimate time" is not the estimated time to do the backups, it is the time it
took to get the estimates for the size of the dumps.
Christoph
Amanda Statistics.
Hi,
Below the statistics from my last backup. I assume the times are all
elapsed times, but why is amanda so wrong in estimating the times? Or is
it a bug?
STATISTICS:
Total Full Daily
Estimate Time (hrs:min)0:03
Run Time (hrs:min) 1:11
Dump Time (hrs:min)0:51 0:51 0:01
Output Size (meg)7692.4 7648.9 43.5
Original Size (meg) 11996.711886.5 110.2
Avg Compressed Size (%)64.1 64.4 39.4
(level:#disks ...)
Filesystems Dumped7 2 5 (1:5)
Avg Dump Rate (k/s) 2559.5 2584.4 950.4
Tape Time (hrs:min)0:49 0:49 0:00
--
Regards,
Erik P. Olsen
GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0x71375E63
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: many dumps in parallel
Vects wrote: Hello there, I mentioned amanda runs only one dump of computer/partition the same time. Is there any way configure amanda to run many dumps at once for different computers? I have 6 computers to backup in disklist, it's about 4 partitions per computer, backup takes long time to finish, I want to speed it up by running parallel dumps to different computers. Actually, that's the default behaviour of amanda: doing as much as possible in parallel. Why do you think it is not working that way? One of the possibilities is that the holdingdisk is too small. The parallelism is achieved by collecting all the dumps to holdingdisk. If you want more than one dump running on one host in parallel, you should increase maxdumps for that DLE, and set a spindle number on each DLE. -- Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel +32 16 397.511 Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax +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, * * init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... * * ... "Are you sure?" ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out * ***
