Try2, Amanda Question
the first time never got to the list, unless there's a massive delay...so here we go again. I have Amanda server running on a RedHat 7.1 system with an HP4mm DAT. works fine when I back up a solaris client. However, when I try to back up a dns-resolved client (a RedHat 7.0 system, same Amanda rev as the Amanda server), I get: Amanda Backup Client Hosts Check ERROR: redhat2.pine-cone.com: [addr 172.16.3.1: hostname lookup failed] Client check: 1 host checked in 0.052 seconds, 1 problem found (brought to you by Amanda 2.4.2p2) DNS works, I even added the client to the /etc/hosts file. I can ping by name from the account. I ran the amcheck from the Redhat 7.0 client and it all checked out. Any ideas? thank you for ANY assistance or ideas, bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc.
RE: Try2, Amanda Question
That's the bitch of it...it IS resolved: via nslookup, via ping--ANYTHING but Amanda. It's bizarre. I'm getting ready to compile amanda from source to see if it's a problem with the rpm on the client. Rpm installs are OK sometimes--other times, I'd rather not deal with 'em. anyone else wanna take a stab at this? thanks anyways, bryan ======== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bort, Paul Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 3:04 PM To: 'Bryan S. Sampsel'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Try2, Amanda Question The problem being reported is that redhat2.pine-cone.com can't resolve the address 172.16.3.1. Either add it to your local DNS, or /etc/hosts. > -----Original Message- > From: Bryan S. Sampsel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 4:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Try2, Amanda Question > > > > the first time never got to the list, unless there's a > massive delay...so here we go again. > > I have Amanda server running on a RedHat 7.1 system with an > HP4mm DAT. works fine when I back up a solaris client. > > However, when I try to back up a dns-resolved client (a > RedHat 7.0 system, same Amanda rev as the Amanda server), I get: > > > Amanda Backup Client Hosts Check > > ERROR: redhat2.pine-cone.com: [addr 172.16.3.1: hostname > lookup failed] > Client check: 1 host checked in 0.052 seconds, 1 problem found > > (brought to you by Amanda 2.4.2p2) > > > > DNS works, I even added the client to the /etc/hosts file. I > can ping by name from the account. > > I ran the amcheck from the Redhat 7.0 client and it all checked out. > > Any ideas? > > thank you for ANY assistance or ideas, > > bryan > > > Bryan S. Sampsel > Systems Administrator > Ambeo, Inc. > >
RE: xinetd set up and my Linux box
xinetd defaults to prevent the amanda ports from being used. You can edit the appropriate files in /etc/xinetd.d and restart the daemon. And, there's the aforementioned .amandahosts to configure. ;) bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John R. Jackson Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 1:11 PM To: Denise Ives Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: xinetd set up and my Linux box >ERROR: sunny3.neptune.com: [access as amanda not allowed from >[EMAIL PROTECTED]] This says sunny3 would not let user "amanda" in from sunny1. First, make sure this line is file ".amandahosts" in directory ~amanda (the home directory of user "amanda") on sunny3: sunny1.neptune.com amanda Next, make sure the file is owned by "amanda" and that it is mode 0600 or 0400. Then make sure all the directories down to the file allow read/execute for user Amanda or a group it is a member of (or everything). One way to do that is run this as root on sunny3: # su amanda "cat ~amanda/.amandahosts" Next, take a look at an amandad*debug file after doing an amcheck (use the "-c" option to just do the client checks) and see what it has to say. And while you're at it, see if the access time on ~amanda/.amandahosts on sunny3 is being updated with "ls -lu". John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Try2, Amanda Question
The only problem is regardin this one client system--the server's amanda cannot resolve it--though it is working for both forward and reverse DNS. I'm going to try to compile it from source instead of RPM tommorrow. On both server and client. bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Olivier Nicole Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 11:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Try2, Amanda Question How about TCP wrapper problem? Reverse DNS? >That's the bitch of it...it IS resolved: via nslookup, via ping--ANYTHING but Amanda. Olivier
RE: Try2, Amanda Question
As stated originally, neither had any affect. thanks. Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bernhard R. Erdmann Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:52 AM To: Bryan S. Sampsel Cc: 'Bort, Paul'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Try2, Amanda Question "Bryan S. Sampsel" wrote: > > That's the bitch of it...it IS resolved: via nslookup, via ping--ANYTHING but Amanda. > > It's bizarre. I'm getting ready to compile amanda from source to see if it's a >problem with the rpm on the client. Rpm installs are OK sometimes--other times, I'd >rather not deal with 'em. > > anyone else wanna take a stab at this? Amanda on the client (redhat2) can't resolve the IP address 172.16.3.1 to a host name. Add a proper line to redhat2's /etc/hosts or set up 3.16.172.in-addr.arpa on your favorite DNS server.
RE: Try2, Amanda Question
Due to the delay on this list, I'll respond to the last three responses... My server (redhat3) cannot resolve redhat2 with Amanda (but can do so otherwise with no problems), which resolves via DNS typically. I added an extra entry for redhat2 to redhat3's host file. I did update the .amandahosts on both systems. Redhat2's client resolves itself no probs and the amcheck runs ok. it's running the amcheck on the server, redhat3 that seems to be broken. I believe nscd is the caching package meant to work with DNS and NIS--I don't use it. Redhat3 (amanda server) is RH 7.1 Redhat2 (amanda client) is RH 7.0 DNS works fine for anything but Amanda for this specific client. My other client, call it Sun2, works fine with amcheck. (Redhat3 amcheck resolves it just fine). bryan ============ Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: dill [mailto:dill]On Behalf Of Jonathan Dill Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:50 AM To: Bryan S. Sampsel Cc: 'Bort, Paul'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Try2, Amanda Question "Bryan S. Sampsel" wrote: > > That's the bitch of it...it IS resolved: via nslookup, via ping--ANYTHING but Amanda. > > It's bizarre. I'm getting ready to compile amanda from source to see if it's a >problem with the rpm on the client. Rpm installs are OK sometimes--other times, I'd >rather not deal with 'em. Do you have all of the redhat updates applied on the client? nscd was buggy in RH 7.0 and that could cause problems with hostname lookups if you use nscd and have not upgraded to the updated rpm. There were also updated rpms for bind-utils, glibc, kernel, and possibly some other packages that could affect hostname lookups. You might want to run "nscd" on the client to do nameservice cacheing. Check out /etc/nsswitch.conf and possibly put "files" first for hosts, but then be careful about keeping /etc/hosts up to date or only put the minimum necessary entries in /etc/hosts. If you use nscd, you might have to do the following to flush the cache (on the amanda client, because that is where the lookups are failing): /etc/rc.d/init.d/nscd restart Stupid question, but did you add the address to /etc/hosts on both the server and the client? -- "Jonathan F. Dill" ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: dds3 or dds4?
The prices are not much different...unless you're talking a multi-tape setup. bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Strickland Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:01 AM To: amanda Subject: Re: dds3 or dds4? On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:58:28PM +0200, Christoph Sold wrote: > > > Tom Strickland schrieb: > > > > We're on the verge of ordering a DDS drive (this week). It'll probably > > be an HP Surestore - but the question is DDS3 or DDS4? There's the > > obvious difference in capacity, but beyond that are there any other > > differences? Speed is an obvious one - any others? > > After some near disasters with DDS tapes, I suggest also considering > DLT1 tapes. Those never failed, even after long storage periods. They > come even pretty cheap. If only! If I was admin for a commercial enterprise, I'd go with DLT or similar - but as a charity branch we just can't afford it. Thanks, Tom
RE: scsi card for dat drive on linux
H...worked with DPT, Adaptec, Buslogic/Symbios Logic/NCR/LSI/whatever they are now Had no complaints about the performance of any of them...but advantage of the LSI's is price (or was, prior to U160 standard). Some linux drivers have been flaky over the years...but the hardware has worked well for all as far as my experience extends (but we all know, two environments, dozens of differences in how identical hardware can be used). bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Anthony A. D. Talltree Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:42 AM To: amanda Subject: Re: scsi card for dat drive on linux >get a cheap Adaptec PCI controller, since Adaptec is the standard in >compatibility. Back when I was forced to attemp to deliver services on x86 hardware, I had various flakiness with 2940's. Less, to be sure, than with the @#$@# Buslogic 946's that I was forced to use before, but still hassles, especially with more than one in a box. When I tried a DPT controller, everything worked perfectly. I wouldn't buy anything else for x86 hardware. As for speed, there's drive throughput, and there's transfer rate. The transfer rate can indeed be an issue -- slow transfers to the tape drive mean more bus occupancy, which means that there's more contention for disk access. This was especially bad eg. on SunOS 3.x, which didn't do SCSI disconnect/reconnect. Writing to a tape on that platform pretty much hung the whole machine if it had a SCSI system disk. So, if a given tape drive does fast and/or wide transfers, having matching support in the controller and cabling can make a difference.
RE: scsi card for dat drive on linux
Whoever told you that you need Adaptect is full of bull. Tekram makes a good, cheap UW controller based on LSI chipset that works great...fraction of cost of the $200 Adaptec UW kit. bryan ps- I'm not knocking Adaptec, but for the UW series controllers, there is no obvious performance difference. ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Strickland Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 5:41 AM To: amanda Subject: scsi card for dat drive on linux In my previous post I mentioned that we're looking to get an HP Surestore. The suppliers said that nothing less a rather expensive Adaptec card would do. If we need to buy an expensive Ultra-Wide card, we will. I would have thought that it was overkill for the speed that such a drive can manage? Am I missing something? Are the lower priced cards of such inferior quality that it would be a mistake to buy them? BTW - no SCSI hard drives in use at the moment - cannot afford them. thanks, Tom
RE: dds3 or dds4?
reliability and tape life-span. I've run DDS2,3,4 and DLT. DDS just can't compete with DLT. Capacity, speed, reliability, bang for the buck, tape life-span, etc. bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Strickland Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:55 AM To: amanda Subject: Re: dds3 or dds4? Thanks...(comments inline) On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 08:43:16AM -0400, Jonathan Dill wrote: > Tom Strickland wrote: > > We're on the verge of ordering a DDS drive (this week). It'll probably > > be an HP Surestore - but the question is DDS3 or DDS4? There's the > > obvious difference in capacity, but beyond that are there any other > > differences? Speed is an obvious one - any others? > > Keep in mind that amanda can't "span" individual backups across multiple > tapes and think about your requirements. If you buy a new disk today, > 18 GB is probably the smallest size that you will find easily available, > and that number keeps going up. I work in an academic research lab > where now some people are getting 75 GB and 180 GB disk drives, and with > new instruments the data sets are increasing in size rapidly. Even the > DDS4 isn't big enough anymore, so I'm having to look into getting a > tapedrive with higher capacity (or using GNUTAR to split up dumps, or > partitioning the drives into smaller chunks, both of which are kind of > messy solutions). If things are different in whatever business you are > in, maybe the DDS3 would be adequate, but it's something to think about. The trouble is that the drive is for a charity. They are becoming more and more server-centric so it becomes increasingly important that we get some kind of off-site backup system in. Our problem is money. I suppose that I may be able to sell the difference in price. HOWEVER - my question was: does anyone know any differences between the two drives OTHER THAN size/speed? For instance, I know that some older models (not DDS3 or DDS4) don't perform read-after-write checking. I was wondering if there is any difference other than size/speed that would make me dump DDS3 in favour of DDS4. Thanks, Tom
RE: How to configure AMANDA to take backup of raw filesystems?
My suggestion, depending on the volume of data, is to export the data via cron to a flat file set and back that up. It isn't pretty, but it will safely backup your data. bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sajith V Mannadiar Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 6:44 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: How to configure AMANDA to take backup of raw filesystems? Hi, How can we configure AMANDA to take backup of "raw" filesystems that are used for storing INFORMIX / ORACLE databases..? Please give me your suggestions.. Thanks, Sajith
RE: Upgrade to 2.4.2p2 client generages "dumps way too big" message
Check your tape definition. I found the HP def to be too small for the DDS3 I was using. Fixed it and all backed up well. bryan Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Oscar Ricardo Silva Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 12:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Upgrade to 2.4.2p2 client generages "dumps way too big" message I noticed that 2.4.2p1 had a problem on some Linux machines (associating /dev/root with /) and saw that this had been fixed in 2.4.2p2. I upgraded the client portion of Amanda on all my backup targets so as to have on consistent version. Unfortunately, right after I did that, I got the following after one backup run: FAILURE AND STRANGE DUMP SUMMARY: cba-ar.gw. /var lev 0 FAILED [dumps too big, but cannot incremental dump new disk] ser11-ar.g /var lev 0 FAILED [dumps too big, but cannot incremental dump new disk] cba-ar.gw. / lev 0 FAILED [dumps too big, but cannot incremental dump new disk] ser11-ar.g / lev 0 FAILED [dumps too big, but cannot incremental dump new disk] cba-ar.gw. /usr lev 0 FAILED [dumps too big, but cannot incremental dump new disk] emissary.o /boot lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] utar3.gw.u /boot lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] scuff.cc.u /boot lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] utar2.gw.u /boot lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] egi.utsyst /usr/ports lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] agnes.ots. / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] cybill.gw. /home lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] emissary.o / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] noc.the.ne / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] mpd.ots.ut / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] egi.utsyst / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] gatekeeper / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] dnscache1. / lev 1 FAILED [dumps way too big, must skip incremental dumps] and more ... This was not the case for all my clients though, some did get backed up. The clients have file systems with sizes ranging from 4GB to 18GB so none are too big. All my backups had been running fine before the upgrade. Any thoughts as to what could be causing this? This is the second night in a row that these errors have been generated. Any information would be appreciated. Oscar
amanda - DATA timeout?
Below is the report, as mailed by my Amanda server.
Until the last few days, Amanda was running the backups with no problems. However, it
has sent me this for the last three, with active dump processes running on the client.
The server: RH7.1 w/ a generic load of Amanda 2.4.2p2
client: RH 7.0 w/ a generic load of Amanda 2.4.2p2
The Tape: HP 4mm DAT, DDS2 4/8GB external SCSI.
I believe, the rest of the relevant info is below my signature.
thanks folks,
bryan
Bryan S. Sampsel
Systems Administrator
Ambeo, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Amanda user [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 11:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Netdirs1 AMANDA MAIL REPORT FOR July 12, 2001
These dumps were to tape Netdirs4.
The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Netdirs5.
FAILURE AND STRANGE DUMP SUMMARY:
redhat2.pi /netdirs lev 0 FAILED [data timeout]
STATISTICS:
Total Full Daily
Estimate Time (hrs:min)0:03
Run Time (hrs:min) 1:07
Dump Time (hrs:min)0:00 0:00 0:00
Output Size (meg) 0.00.00.0
Original Size (meg) 0.00.00.0
Avg Compressed Size (%) -- -- --
Filesystems Dumped0 0 0
Avg Dump Rate (k/s) -- -- --
Tape Time (hrs:min)0:00 0:00 0:00
Tape Size (meg) 0.00.00.0
Tape Used (%) 0.00.00.0
Filesystems Taped 0 0 0
Avg Tp Write Rate (k/s) -- -- --
FAILED AND STRANGE DUMP DETAILS:
/-- redhat2.pi /netdirs lev 0 FAILED [data timeout]
sendbackup: start [redhat2.pine-cone.com:/netdirs level 0]
sendbackup: info BACKUP=/sbin/dump
sendbackup: info RECOVER_CMD=/sbin/restore -f... -
sendbackup: info end
| DUMP: Date of this level 0 dump: Thu Jul 12 22:00:46 2001
| DUMP: Date of last level 0 dump: the epoch
| DUMP: Dumping /dev/hdb2 (/netdirs) to standard output
| DUMP: Label: none
| DUMP: mapping (Pass I) [regular files]
| DUMP: mapping (Pass II) [directories]
| DUMP: estimated 3406093 tape blocks.
| DUMP: Volume 1 started at: Thu Jul 12 22:01:45 2001
| DUMP: dumping (Pass III) [directories]
| DUMP: dumping (Pass IV) [regular files]
| DUMP: 6.79% done, finished in 1:08
| DUMP: 13.92% done, finished in 1:01
| DUMP: 20.96% done, finished in 0:56
| DUMP: 28.12% done, finished in 0:51
| DUMP: 35.24% done, finished in 0:45
| DUMP: 42.37% done, finished in 0:40
\
NOTES:
planner: Last full dump of redhat2.pine-cone.com:/netdirs on tape overwritten in 1
run.
taper: tape Netdirs4 kb 0 fm 0 [OK]
DUMP SUMMARY:
DUMPER STATSTAPER STATS
HOSTNAME DISKL ORIG-KB OUT-KB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s MMM:SS KB/s
-- -
redhat2.pine /netdirs0 FAILED ---
(brought to you by Amanda version 2.4.2p2)
RE: amanda - DATA timeout?
Dump: dump-0.4b19-4 Hopefully, Redhat will have an updated RPM that is compatible with RH7.0. I've noticed not all their RPMs work on older installations, even one rev apart from their current release. Should that fail, anyone know where to get a generic dump/restore source? thanks, bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: John R. Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 4:52 PM To: Bryan S. Sampsel Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: amanda - DATA timeout? >client: RH 7.0 w/ a generic load of Amanda 2.4.2p2 What version of dump are you using? I think the last time this came up, the person upgraded to the latest (and/or restore as well) and things started working. Basically the error is saying dumper on the tape server waited half an hour and didn't hear a peep out of the client. But it's hard to tell exactly where things are jammed up. >bryan John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: amanda - DATA timeout?
there's a sourceforge page on dump-restore: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=1306 I was down a good four revisions...and redhat seems to still be shipping the same version...not that their website is worth much for finding patches, but... anyways, I'll try upgrading dump/restore and see how things work. thanks for the pointer, bryan ==== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bryan S. Sampsel Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 9:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: amanda - DATA timeout? Dump: dump-0.4b19-4 Hopefully, Redhat will have an updated RPM that is compatible with RH7.0. I've noticed not all their RPMs work on older installations, even one rev apart from their current release. Should that fail, anyone know where to get a generic dump/restore source? thanks, bryan ======== Bryan S. Sampsel Systems Administrator Ambeo, Inc. -Original Message- From: John R. Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 4:52 PM To: Bryan S. Sampsel Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: amanda - DATA timeout? >client: RH 7.0 w/ a generic load of Amanda 2.4.2p2 What version of dump are you using? I think the last time this came up, the person upgraded to the latest (and/or restore as well) and things started working. Basically the error is saying dumper on the tape server waited half an hour and didn't hear a peep out of the client. But it's hard to tell exactly where things are jammed up. >bryan John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
