Re: FAQ-O-Matic server has filesystem problems???
Brian Neu schreef: When trying to post my amtapetype output at http://amanda.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/fom the page gave the error AMANDA FAQ Warnings: # FAQ::OMatic::Log::logEvent: The access logging system is not working. open failed (Read-only file system) # Can't create lockfile /home/groups/a/am/amanda/fom/meta//idfile.lck (Read-only file system) This is a Faq-O-Matic http://www.dartmouth.edu/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/jonh/faq.pl 2.709. This FAQ administered by the Amanda Team There is now the wiki, much more powerful than than FOM: http://wiki.zmanda.com/ -- 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, * * kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ...* * ... Are you sure? ... YES ... Phew ... I'm out * ***
RE FAQ-O-Matic server has filesystem problems???
Yep, I also had the error a few weeks ago... [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit sur 22/06/2006 19:57:59 : When trying to post my amtapetype output at http://amanda.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/fom the page gave the error AMANDA FAQ Warnings: FAQ::OMatic::Log::logEvent: The access logging system is not working. open failed (Read-only file system) Can't create lockfile /home/groups/a/am/amanda/fom/meta//idfile.lck (Read-only file system) This is a Faq-O-Matic 2.709. This FAQ administered by the Amanda Team
FAQ-O-Matic server has filesystem problems???
When trying to post my amtapetype output at http://amanda.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/fomthe page gave the error AMANDA FAQ Warnings: FAQ::OMatic::Log::logEvent: The access logging system is not working. open failed (Read-only file system) Can't create lockfile /home/groups/a/am/amanda/fom/meta//idfile.lck (Read-only file system) This is a Faq-O-Matic 2.709. This FAQ administered by the Amanda Team
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Jon,
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:25:46PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:54:34PM -0400, Brian Cuttler wrote:
The -e made a huge difference in runtime.
# date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3n ; date
Wed May 24 09:23:58 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 33 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61853 kps
}
I really should run it again with HW compresson ON.
If like my ultrium 1, the block count will be exactly the same,
but the speed will be slower.
You are right, largely the same, run time of 3h 38 min and the speed
was a little lower, but only by about 1%, but I don't know enough
about the amtapetype and maybe the pattern of the data written has
a lot to do with that.
date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3un ; date
Wed May 24 14:55:53 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 34 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12320768 32Kb blocks in 94 files in 6320 seconds (short write)
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6487 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61742 kps
}
Wed May 24 18:33:20 EDT 2006
thank you,
Brian
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:49:47AM -0400, Brian Cuttler wrote:
Jon,
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:25:46PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:54:34PM -0400, Brian Cuttler wrote:
The -e made a huge difference in runtime.
# date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3n ; date
Wed May 24 09:23:58 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 33 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61853 kps
}
I really should run it again with HW compresson ON.
If like my ultrium 1, the block count will be exactly the same,
but the speed will be slower.
You are right, largely the same, run time of 3h 38 min and the speed
was a little lower, but only by about 1%, but I don't know enough
about the amtapetype and maybe the pattern of the data written has
a lot to do with that.
date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3un ; date
Wed May 24 14:55:53 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 34 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12320768 32Kb blocks in 94 files in 6320 seconds (short write)
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6487 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61742 kps
}
Well, actually a little different. I got my Ultrium 1 from ebay and
like a kid with a new toy ran several tapetypes on it. Three different
physical tapes (two brands), one two times, and with 3 different block
sizes, and a couple with and without compression on.
The thing that flabbergasted me was the absolute consistancy of the
total blocks written (adjusted for block size).
Two of your report lines were like mine:
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write)
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6487 seconds (short write)
Oh, I did some with a different scsi controller too as the first one I
used was too low performance. Same block count though.
--
Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG Computing
4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159
Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Jon, On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 10:33:48AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: Well, actually a little different. I got my Ultrium 1 from ebay and like a kid with a new toy ran several tapetypes on it. Three different physical tapes (two brands), one two times, and with 3 different block sizes, and a couple with and without compression on. The thing that flabbergasted me was the absolute consistancy of the total blocks written (adjusted for block size). Two of your report lines were like mine: wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write) wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6487 seconds (short write) Oh, I did some with a different scsi controller too as the first one I used was too low performance. Same block count though. Actually I'm now wondering how to keep the drive busy, what can be done to feed it better. I'm pretty sure I'm going to need a second work area as I add partitions but disk to tape speed might be too slow for this drive. I just have to perform a number of dumps and check the actual speed if its below the shoe-shine limit... what is that for this drive anyway, with the noise in my computer room I'm not certain that I'll be able to hear it if its in trouble. thanks, Brian --- Brian R Cuttler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer Systems Support(v) 518 486-1697 Wadsworth Center(f) 518 473-6384 NYS Department of HealthHelp Desk 518 473-0773
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On Thu, 25 May 2006 at 10:44am, Brian Cuttler wrote slow for this drive. I just have to perform a number of dumps and check the actual speed if its below the shoe-shine limit... what is that for this drive anyway, with the noise in my computer room I'm not certain that I'll be able to hear it if its in trouble. AIUI, the drive can throttle back to 1/2 its native write speed of 80MB/s. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On 2006-05-23 22:22, Pavel Pragin wrote: Brian Cuttler wrote: Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Try using this command to determine tapetype: amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think When pointing people to this command, please don't forget that they should better add the -e 400g option too. Without the -e option the runtime of this command is measured in days (maybe weeks for this kind of tapecapacity!!!) instead of 4-8 hours. -- Paul Bijnens, xplanation Technology ServicesTel +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: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Jon, On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 05:40:02PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:22:02PM -0700, Pavel Pragin wrote: Brian Cuttler wrote: Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better performance/utilization ? This is still a reasonable default ? tapebufs 20 I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory. Try using this command to determine tapetype: amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think A tapetype run on an lto-3 drive without a good estimate option might take about 14 days to complete :( That may explain why this was STILL running when I came in this morning. # date; amtapetype -f /dev/rmt/3n; date Tue May 23 16:09:49 EDT 2006 Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 33 sec Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec Estimated time to write 2 * 1024 Mbyte: 33 sec = 0 h 0 min wrote 3470778 32Kb blocks in 10614 files in 37354 seconds (short write) wrote 1085906 32Kb blocks in 6662 files Truth be told, on this system, which is the amanda server for a fair number of clients, we disabled SW-compression in favor of HW-compression on the StorEdge L9 jukebox with LTO drives. We had 2 of those, one running amanda against the client==server and one running amanda for client!=server, both configs ran 5/week. We also saved a number of slots in one jukebox for a 3rd amanda config which ran 1/week with always-full. We found that the nightly would sometimes run a second tape and the weekly was running onto the 4th tape. With the failure of one L9 we had to revise the situation. Not that I wish to speak badly of the L9/LTO, it ran without error (occasional need to recalibrate, which it does on power up) for close to 5 years and it was our decision not to place on maintenance. With the failure of one L9 we moved to a more traditional 5/week for all DLE under the single amanda config. We are finding that with HW-compression and a 5 day dumpcycle and 5 runs/week we fit all DLE onto a single tape each night with no difficulty. Strong argument for the L9/LTO. We will probably add more clients once the C2/LTO3 is in play, I'm sure it will last us for years... but I'm going to need more disk space for amanda work area. Oh, here is a thought/question. Would read performace during dumper portion be any better if the DLE's chunks where round-robined across multiple work areas rather than placing them into a single work area until that work area was filled ? I hate to ask this, it exposed my ignorance of unix file systems, not that there is only one to chose from (we have ext3(?), xfs and ufs in use now for amanda work areas, probably more to follow). The file open for the chunks, is there a way to pre-allocate the disk space to reduce file fragmentation/write times, window turns ? I know, old ODS-2 terms, back when I'd make sure to specify the file extention size when doing something like this. Is there a unix equiv ? YUMV (your unix may vary). thank you, Brian
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Paul,
The -e made a huge difference in runtime.
For what its worth, here is the result I received.
# date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3n ; date
Wed May 24 09:23:58 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 33 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61853 kps
}
Wed May 24 13:01:08 EDT 2006
3 1/2 hours, the previous attempt ran overnight and was not where
near complete.
I really should run it again with HW compresson ON.
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 10:15:03AM +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
On 2006-05-23 22:22, Pavel Pragin wrote:
Brian Cuttler wrote:
Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ?
Try using this command to determine tapetype:
amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think
When pointing people to this command, please don't forget that they
should better add the -e 400g option too.
Without the -e option the runtime of this command is measured in days
(maybe weeks for this kind of tapecapacity!!!) instead of 4-8 hours.
--
Paul Bijnens, xplanation Technology ServicesTel +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 *
***
---
Brian R Cuttler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computer Systems Support(v) 518 486-1697
Wadsworth Center(f) 518 473-6384
NYS Department of HealthHelp Desk 518 473-0773
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:54:34PM -0400, Brian Cuttler wrote:
Paul,
The -e made a huge difference in runtime.
For what its worth, here is the result I received.
# date ; amtapetype -e 400g -f /dev/rmt/3n ; date
Wed May 24 09:23:58 EDT 2006
Writing 2048 Mbyte compresseable data: 33 sec
Writing 2048 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 33 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 912 sec = 0 h 15 min
wrote 12386304 32Kb blocks in 189 files in 6539 seconds (short write)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 386048 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 61853 kps
}
I really should run it again with HW compresson ON.
If like my ultrium 1, the block count will be exactly the same,
but the speed will be slower.
--
Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG Computing
4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159
Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better performance/utilization ? This is still a reasonable default ? tapebufs 20 I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory. thank you, Brian --- Brian R Cuttler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer Systems Support(v) 518 486-1697 Wadsworth Center(f) 518 473-6384 NYS Department of HealthHelp Desk 518 473-0773
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Brian Cuttler wrote: Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better performance/utilization ? This is still a reasonable default ? tapebufs 20 I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory. thank you, Brian --- Brian R Cuttler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer Systems Support(v) 518 486-1697 Wadsworth Center(f) 518 473-6384 NYS Department of HealthHelp Desk 518 473-0773 Try using this command to determine tapetype: amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On Tue, 23 May 2006 at 3:55pm, Brian Cuttler wrote
Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ?
This is what I use:
define tapetype LTO3comp {
# All values guesswork :) jlb, 8/31/05
# except blocksize ;) jlb, 9/15/05
length 42 mbytes
blocksize 2048
filemark 5577 kbytes
speed 6 kps
lbl-templ 3hole.ps
}
I leave hardware compression on (why not, with LTO), but most of my data
isn't all that compressible. I get much better speed with the blocksize
above (2MiB) rather than amanda's default of 64K. I determined that by
testing raw write speed to the tape with tar and various blocksizes.
Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better
performance/utilization ?
This is still a reasonable default ?
tapebufs 20
On Linux at least, with the blocksize above I had to dial back tapebufs to
15 or I got this warning in my nightly emails:
taper: attach_buffers: (20 tapebufs: 41947616 bytes) Invalid argument
taper: attach_buffers: (19 tapebufs: 39850440 bytes) Invalid argument
taper: attach_buffers: (18 tapebufs: 37753264 bytes) Invalid argument
taper: attach_buffers: (17 tapebufs: 35656088 bytes) Invalid argument
taper: attach_buffers: (16 tapebufs: 33558912 bytes) Invalid argument
I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R
under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory.
My usual warning with LTO3 is to make sure that your disks can keep up
with your tape. Yes, you read that right. Especially with amanda dumping
to holding disk while trying to write to tape, it's tough to feed LTO3 as
fast as it wants to be fed (80MB/s native write speed). LTO3 can throttle
back to half that without shoeshining the drive, but you don't want to see
your write speeds below that.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:22:02PM -0700, Pavel Pragin wrote: Brian Cuttler wrote: Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better performance/utilization ? This is still a reasonable default ? tapebufs 20 I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory. Try using this command to determine tapetype: amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think A tapetype run on an lto-3 drive without a good estimate option might take about 14 days to complete :( -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: tapetape (not in faq-o-matic)
Jon LaBadie wrote: On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:22:02PM -0700, Pavel Pragin wrote: Brian Cuttler wrote: Does anyone have the tape type for the LTO3 (Quantum) ? Are there any other parameters I should tweak to get better performance/utilization ? This is still a reasonable default ? tapebufs 20 I am running the StorEdge C2 jukebox with lto3 drive on a SunFire 280R under Solaris 9 with 4 gig of memory. Try using this command to determine tapetype: amtapetype -f /dev/nst0 (/dev/nst0) will be diff for solaris i think A tapetype run on an lto-3 drive without a good estimate option might take about 14 days to complete :( at least it will be accurate ;-)
FAQ-O-Matic (was: RE: Dell Powervault 120T w/ DLT7000 (ADIC FastS tor DLT D116 + QUANTUM DLT7000 2561))
Yes, I tried that. I never recieved my confirmation code via e-mail. I Same for me, some weeks ago. I thought this service died silently. Best Uwe Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit Version: AVK 15.0.6311 from 29.07.2005
Re: FAQ-O-Matic (was: RE: Dell Powervault 120T w/ DLT7000 (ADIC FastS tor DLT D116 + QUANTUM DLT7000 2561))
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I tried that. I never recieved my confirmation code via e-mail. I Same for me, some weeks ago. I thought this service died silently. AFAIK it's broken ... And I would prefer to migrate to some Wiki instead. I have started playing with Docbook-Wiki (http://doc-book.sourceforge.net/homepage/) to connect the Docbook/XML-Sources of the current AMANDA-docs to that new way of providing and collecting infos. As it isn't that easy to use this on the sourceforge-webserver I am still looking for a good and solid place to host this ... -- Stefan G. Weichinger AMANDA core team member mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- oops! linux consulting implementation http://www.oops.co.at --
Re: barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 at 8:09pm, Will Lowe wrote Thanks! But I was looking for information on what amanda uses the barcode reader in the robot for, and how to make the tapechanger scripts do it -- not on how to print labels. As you label tapes, amanda will populate a file named $CONFIG/CHANGER-barcodes, with a list of tape labels and their corresponding barcodes. Whether or not amanda uses this list, I don't actually know. But it can be very helpful to you at restore time. To get your barcode reader working, install mtx. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
Re: barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
To get your barcode reader working, install mtx. Hmm, and use which changer script? chg-zd-mtx? I've got barcodes set up and mtx seems to find them: Storage Changer /dev/sg1:1 Drives, 23 Slots ( 0 Import/Export ) Data Transfer Element 0:Full (Storage Element 7 Loaded):VolumeTag = 07 Storage Element 1:Full :VolumeTag=01 but the barcodes file I told it to make is empty even after an amtape update run. -- thanks, Will
Re: barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 at 8:39am, Will Lowe wrote To get your barcode reader working, install mtx. Hmm, and use which changer script? chg-zd-mtx? I've got barcodes set up and mtx seems to find them: Yep, that's what I use. Storage Changer /dev/sg1:1 Drives, 23 Slots ( 0 Import/Export ) Data Transfer Element 0:Full (Storage Element 7 Loaded):VolumeTag = 07 Storage Element 1:Full :VolumeTag=01 but the barcodes file I told it to make is empty even after an amtape update run. Hm. Well, the man page says Update the changer label database, if it has one. Did it exist already before running that command? -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
Re: barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
Will Lowe wrote: To get your barcode reader working, install mtx. Hmm, and use which changer script? chg-zd-mtx? That's what I use, and it works fine. Just follow the instructions inside the changer.conf file to get it working. Alex -- Alexander Jolk / BUF Compagnie tel +33-1 42 68 18 28 / fax +33-1 42 68 18 29
Re: barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
(and is the FOM gone for good?) no, it should be back up now. -Todd
barcode reader help (and faq-o-matic-toast?)
I've got a Dell PV132T changer I'm trying to get working and I'm looking for the stuff that used to be on the faq-o-matic about barcode readers. The FOM seems to be toast. Anybody know where I can find it? (and is the FOM gone for good?) -- thanks, Will
faq-o-matic broken
The Faq-o-matic appears to be broken at amanda.org...? wab
Re: FAQ-O-Matic gone?
Todd Kover wrote: It looks like someone wiped out a bunch of the faq-o-matic data at sourceforge. I'm seeing if I can recover it but it mean reverting the faq-o-matic back to an old backup version... :-( You are not going to tell us that the amanda team doesn't have a recent backup? :-) SCNR Sven
FAQ-O-Matic gone?
Just noticed that the FAQ-O-Matic linked off of amanda.org seems to be down: http://www.amanda.org/cgi-bin/fom? It asks for a temporary password to install the faq-o-matic! -- Matthew Boeckman (816) 777-2160 Manager - Systems Integration Saepio Technologies
Re: FAQ-O-Matic gone?
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 08:28:05AM -0600, Matthew Boeckman wrote: Just noticed that the FAQ-O-Matic linked off of amanda.org seems to be down: http://www.amanda.org/cgi-bin/fom? It asks for a temporary password to install the faq-o-matic! Best one to tell that to is the [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just did. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: FAQ-O-Matic gone?
Just noticed that the FAQ-O-Matic linked off of amanda.org seems to be down: http://www.amanda.org/cgi-bin/fom? It asks for a temporary password to install the faq-o-matic! Best one to tell that to is the [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just did. actually, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (different set of people). It looks like someone wiped out a bunch of the faq-o-matic data at sourceforge. I'm seeing if I can recover it but it mean reverting the faq-o-matic back to an old backup version... :-( -Todd
Re: FAQ-O-Matic gone?
On Monday 02 December 2002 09:28, Matthew Boeckman wrote: Just noticed that the FAQ-O-Matic linked off of amanda.org seems to be down: http://www.amanda.org/cgi-bin/fom? It asks for a temporary password to install the faq-o-matic! Jean-Louis M's site at umontreal is also incommunicado. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.19% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re: Faq-o-matic Update
I deleted config.cache before reconfiguring. Should that have done the trick? On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 18:57, Jon LaBadie wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 12:19:47PM -0400, Jason Greenberg wrote: To whomever maintains the amanda faq-o-matic: RE: Issue: http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/310.html, Behavior: This issue can also persist even after an upgrade to gnutar 1.13.19. Even after re-configuring , compiling and installing amanda with the new gnutar specified --with-gnutar=/usr/local/bin/tar (1.13.25), amanda continued to use /bin/tar. The issue was resolved by physically replacing /bin/tar with gnutar 1.13.19. When you reconfigured, did you first do a make distclean to get rid of any cached configure information? -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax) -- Jason Greenberg, CCNP Network Administrator Execulink, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Faq-o-matic Update
To whomever maintains the amanda faq-o-matic: RE: Issue: http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/310.html, Behavior: This issue can also persist even after an upgrade to gnutar 1.13.19. Even after re-configuring , compiling and installing amanda with the new gnutar specified --with-gnutar=/usr/local/bin/tar (1.13.25), amanda continued to use /bin/tar. The issue was resolved by physically replacing /bin/tar with gnutar 1.13.19. -- Jason Greenberg, CCNP Network Administrator Execulink, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem with FAQ-O-Matic?
I was writing another email to the list, and was going to suggest someone add something to FAQ-O-Matic. So, I figured I would just go and do it, but when I tried to add a user login, I got the following error: FAQ::OMatic::Auth::readIDfile: Couldn't read /home/groups/a/am/amanda/fom/meta//idfile because Permission denied Has this happened to anyone else? Who should I contact about this potential problem?
tapeless setup (since FAQ-O-Matic remains defunct)
I've searched the archives and find brief mention of file: tapedev entries and a branch of the CVS tree called amanda-242-tapeio. I've grabbed that branch and can't find anything related to file: Anybody have a how-to or another pointer? Filesystem1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ccd0c241302969 2233750 219764982 1%/backup /backup is awaiting data AlanC -- Alan Clegg I do UNIX and Networks [EMAIL PROTECTED]I don't have any certification I have experience PGP signature
Amanda FAQ-O-Matic (again)
The amanda FAQ-O-Matic is (was?) hosted at sourceforge.net, and apparently a few days ago someone ran an rm -rf / as nobody over there, which blew away all the FAQ-O-Matic's for all the servers hosted there, which all were writing FAQ-O-Matic entries as nobody due to webserver permissions, etc. I have filed a support request with the good folks at SourceForge http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=472281group_id=1atid=21 to see if they can restore the files. Updates as they come in... Marc
Amanda FAQ-O-Matic
Re: FAQ o matic broken?
In a message dated: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 18:33:30 CDT Marc W. Mengel said: I'm asking around on amanda-hackers. It looks like the cgi-bin directory for the amanda pages on sourceforge has been deleted... Do! Were they using Amanda to back that system up ? :) -- Seeya, Paul God Bless America! ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon
Re: FAQ-o-MATIC
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jon LaBadie writes: Do we have any of the Core Developement Team who have knowledge of how to maintain the pages? The last updates are dated 2001/04/04. I just posted a message about FOM being broken to the amanda-hackers list. --Dave Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FAQ-o-MATIC
At 10:34 AM 10/16/2001 -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: OK, we are all agreed that it is broken. The real question is who maintains the web page www.amanda.org? FWIW: I have printouts of several FAQ-o-MATIC pages dated Sept 26, 2001 ... so it broke more recently than that. Deb Baddorf --- Deb Baddorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] 840-2289 You can't help getting older, but you don't have to get old. - George Burns IXOYE
FAQ-o-matic down?!
What's up with the FAQ's...trying to get my linux RH amanda server to backup an NT box through samba...figured there was some guidance in the FAQ but it's FORBIDDEN!! Rebecca A. Pakish Systems Administrator Unterberg Associates, P.C. (219) 736-5579 ext. 184
Amanda Faq-O-Matic
Hi all, As I was browsing the Amanda FOM, I noticed that not only are there a bunch of empty New Item listings, but also that there is a lot of information missing from the FAQ that I would expect to be in there. If whomever is in charge of the FOM is willing, I'll gladly volunteer to clean it up and start adding the missing FAQs to it. Feel free to contact me on or off list about this :) -- Seeya, Paul ...we don't need to be perfect to be the best around, and we never stop trying to be better. Tom Clancy, The Bear and The Dragon If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
Re: problems with faq-o-matic
On Feb 12, 2001, Joseph Del Corso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
print on closed filehandle FAQ::OMatic::ERRORFILE at
/home/groups/amanda/fom/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.005/FAQ/OMatic.pm line 224.
Yep. Sourceforge folks screwed up our installation of FOM. We've
already asked them to fix it a few days ago, but no news so far :-(
http://sourceforge.net/support/?func=detailsupportsupport_id=113868group_id=1
Meanwhile, this alternate URL will at least let you browse the
existing entries: http://www.amanda.org/fom-serve/cache/1.html
I'll add it to our web pages.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicampoliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist*Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
Re: AIT-1 tapetype, FAQ-O-Matic, and compression
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
I just got a SDX-300C (35GB native AIT-1) drive for archival dumps. Does
anybody have any experience with these regarding a realistic guesstimate
of hardware compressed capacity? Tapetype?
Here are my defs for AIT-1 with 25G and 35G tapes:
define tapetype AIT1-25 {
comment "AIT-1 cartridge 25/50 GB"
lbl-templ "/var/opt/amanda/etc/lbl-templ/AIT.ps"
length 23500 mbytes # lowest number seen so far, rounded down
filemark 500 kbytes
speed 3000 mbytes
}
define tapetype AIT1-35 {
comment "AIT-1 cartridge 35/70 GB"
lbl-templ "/var/opt/amanda/etc/lbl-templ/AIT.ps"
length 33200 mbytes # 33400 was lowest seen till now
filemark 500 kbytes
speed 3000 mbytes
}
From my experience since one and a half year now, the drives work perfect,
fast and easy (and are cheap compared to DLT).
Also, I'm running RedHat6.2 with an updated mt-st-0.6. Am I right in
assuming that, despite no obvious change in the output of 'mt stat',
'mt compression {0|1}' is actually turing compression off/on? There *is*
a bit of an increase in throughput with it "on".
Mine are connected to Sun servers. But you can indeed notice that the
throughput increases with compression on, because it is recording
on the tape that limits the throughput (it almost doubles with files
that are compressable to 50%).
In attachment, a little perlscript that you use to try things out:
$ gendata -v /dev/st0 # uncompressable data,
... # feedback every 10 Mbytes
^C # you may interrupt it anytime
$ gendata -cv /dev/st0 # now again with compressable data
...
--
Paul Bijnens, Lant Tel +32 16 40.51.40
Interleuvenlaan 15 H, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUM Fax +32 16 40.49.61
http://www.lant.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 *
***
#!/usr/bin/perl
# (c) 1996 Paul Bijnens
# This program may be freely distributed.
# generate stream of random characters that can not be compressed
# (compress will do about -32% on the outputstream)
# give feedback
# bug: even without opt_n it will stop after MAXINT Mbyte
do "getopts.pl" || die "Can't include getopts.pl";
do Getopts('qvcCn:b:') || die 'EOS';
Usage: gendata [-vcCq] [-b #] [-n #]
-qbe quiet, no summary at end
-vverbose - give feedback every 10MB (time bytes)
-cgenerate compresseable data (compress: about 42% compression)
-Cgenerate very compresseable data (compress: about 85% compression)
-b #u output block size (def. 5k, max 1Mbyte); unit can be empty, "k" or "M"
-n # stop after # Mbyte outputbytes
EOS
$lagspan = 10;
$n = int($opt_n);
if ($opt_b) {
($obs, $unit) = ($opt_b =~ /^([\d.]+)(.*)/);
if ($unit eq "") {
; # ok
} elsif ($unit =~ /^[kK]$/) {
$obs *= 1024;
} elsif ($unit =~ /^[mM]$/) {
$obs *= 1024 * 1024;
} else {
die "$0: Bad unit in output block size\n";
}
}
$obs = 5 * 1024 if ($obs = 0);
srand();
for ($i = 0; $i 32*1024; $i++) {
$buf1 .= chr(rand(256));
$buf2 .= chr(rand(256)) unless ($opt_C);
$buf3 .= chr(rand(256)) unless ($opt_C);
$buf4 .= chr(rand(256)) unless ($opt_C);
}
if ($opt_C) {
$buf = unpack("b*", $buf1);
} elsif ($opt_c) {
$buf = unpack("h*", $buf1 . $buf3 . $buf2 . $buf4);
} else {
$buf = $buf1 . $buf3 . $buf2 . $buf4;
$buf .= $buf;
}
undef $buf1;
undef $buf2;
undef $buf3;
undef $buf4;
$buf .= $buf;
$buf .= $buf;
$obs = length($buf) if ($obs length($buf)); # Max 1 Mbyte now
$buf .= substr($buf, 0, $obs); # make sure we can write complete blocks
# in 1 syswrite call
$starttime = time;
unless ($opt_q) {
$SIG{'INT'} = 'atend';
$SIG{'PIPE'} = 'atend';
$SIG{__DIE__} = 'atend';
}
# loop 10MB at a time
$s = 1024 * 1024;
while (1) {
shift(@times) if (scalar(@times) = $lagspan);
push(@times, time);
progress if ($opt_v);
for (1..10) {
$s -= 1024 * 1024;
do {
syswrite(STDOUT, $buf, $obs, $s) || die("$!\n");
} while (($s += $obs) 1024 * 1024);
if (--$n == 0) {
atend unless($opt_q);
exit 0;
}
}
}
atend unless $opt_q;
exit;
sub progress {
$lag = $times[$#times] - $times[0];
Re: AIT-1 tapetype, FAQ-O-Matic, and compression
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 at 10:26am, Paul Bijnens wrote
define tapetype AIT1-35 {
comment "AIT-1 cartridge 35/70 GB"
lbl-templ "/var/opt/amanda/etc/lbl-templ/AIT.ps"
length 33200 mbytes # 33400 was lowest seen till now
filemark 500 kbytes
speed 3000 mbytes
}
And here's what tapetype from 2.4.2p1 tells me (I ran it overnight last
night):
define tapetype SDX-300C {
comment "just produced by tapetype program"
length 33077 mbytes
filemark 32 kbytes
speed 3032 kps
}
Do you have any feel for a "realistic" compressed number?
In attachment, a little perlscript that you use to try things out:
$ gendata -v /dev/st0 # uncompressable data,
... # feedback every 10 Mbytes
^C # you may interrupt it anytime
$ gendata -cv /dev/st0 # now again with compressable data
...
Thanks!
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
AIT-1 tapetype, FAQ-O-Matic, and compression
Just in case no one has noticed yet, FAQ-O-Matic is currently broken.
Thus...
I just got a SDX-300C (35GB native AIT-1) drive for archival dumps. Does
anybody have any experience with these regarding a realistic guesstimate
of hardware compressed capacity? Tapetype?
Also, I'm running RedHat6.2 with an updated mt-st-0.6. Am I right in
assuming that, despite no obvious change in the output of 'mt stat',
'mt compression {0|1}' is actually turing compression off/on? There *is*
a bit of an increase in throughput with it "on".
Thanks, all.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
