RE: amanda article on sun.com
Plus at least on 2.6, ufsdump cleans tar's clock when it comes to speed. Dana Bourgeois > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon LaBadie > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: amanda article on sun.com > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 04:24:17PM +1300, Steve Wray wrote: > > Its interesting that they don't configure it to use gnu > tar... and so > > far as I can tell, none of the config that they give would > use gnutar > > to backup Solaris boxes. > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:02, Galen Johnson wrote: > > > Jon LaBadie wrote: > > > >Recently posted to the "Big Admin" > > > >section of Sun's website is a pretty > > > >long article on setting up amanda. > > > > > > > >Haven't read it yet, so I'm unable > > > >to comment on its content. > > > > > > > > >http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=47250049-814460813:10687624 99806 > > > > > > or > > > > > >http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html > > Strictly a guess at the rationale: standard Solaris does not come with gnutar an optionally installed package does include it, but it is version 1.13, not suitable for amanda. - -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
RE: amanda article on sun.com
Plus at least on 2.6, ufsdump cleans tar's clock when it comes to speed. Dana Bourgeois > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon LaBadie > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: amanda article on sun.com > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 04:24:17PM +1300, Steve Wray wrote: > > Its interesting that they don't configure it to use gnu > tar... and so > > far as I can tell, none of the config that they give would > use gnutar > > to backup Solaris boxes. > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:02, Galen Johnson wrote: > > > Jon LaBadie wrote: > > > >Recently posted to the "Big Admin" > > > >section of Sun's website is a pretty > > > >long article on setting up amanda. > > > > > > > >Haven't read it yet, so I'm unable > > > >to comment on its content. > > > > > > > > >http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=47250049-814460813:10687624 99806 > > > > > > or > > > > > >http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html > > Strictly a guess at the rationale: standard Solaris does not come with gnutar an optionally installed package does include it, but it is version 1.13, not suitable for amanda. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: amanda article on sun.com
Jon LaBadie wrote: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html In the example config file we find these strange (wrong) values: > dumpcycle 3 weeks # the number of days in the normal dump cycle > > runspercycle 8 # the number of amdump runs in dumpcycle days > # (4 weeks * 5 amdump runs per week -- just weekdays) > > tapecycle 12 tapes # the number of tapes in rotation (as an excuse, they only have dumptypes where "dumpcycle 0" overrides the dumpcycle of 3 weeks - so everything is a full backup, and then "runspercycle" does not matter much any more.) I'm expecting to get a lot of questions about the meaning and relationships between these three parameters :-) And the comments don't help clarify this either. Just for the beginners, here are some more reasonable values: dumpcycle 1 week runspersycle 5 tapecycle 12 tapes -- 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: amanda article on sun.com
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 04:24:17PM +1300, Steve Wray wrote: > Its interesting that they don't configure it to use gnu tar... > and so far as I can tell, none of the config that they give > would use gnutar to backup Solaris boxes. > > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:02, Galen Johnson wrote: > > Jon LaBadie wrote: > > >Recently posted to the "Big Admin" > > >section of Sun's website is a pretty > > >long article on setting up amanda. > > > > > >Haven't read it yet, so I'm unable > > >to comment on its content. > > > > > >http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=47250049-814460813:1068762499806 > > > > > > or > > > > > >http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html > > Strictly a guess at the rationale: standard Solaris does not come with gnutar an optionally installed package does include it, but it is version 1.13, not suitable for amanda. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: amanda article on sun.com
Its interesting that they don't configure it to use gnu tar... and so far as I can tell, none of the config that they give would use gnutar to backup Solaris boxes. On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:02, Galen Johnson wrote: > Jon LaBadie wrote: > >Recently posted to the "Big Admin" > >section of Sun's website is a pretty > >long article on setting up amanda. > > > >Haven't read it yet, so I'm unable > >to comment on its content. > > > >http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=47250049-814460813:1068762499806 > > > > or > > > >http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html > > Not a bad article...very straight-forward. It even walks you through > creating a package for Solaris. The only thing I might have recommended > different would've been to split out the tapetype, dumptypes and > interfaces into separate files and 'include'd them in the main config > file rather than keeping a monolithic conf file. That would make for > cleaner config files since the info you would tend to reuse between > configs would be in a central location...plus it would allow you to > update the files once instead of however many config files you had...but > that's just me... > > gonna add this link to my Amanda links. > > =G=
Re: amanda article on sun.com
Jon LaBadie wrote: Recently posted to the "Big Admin" section of Sun's website is a pretty long article on setting up amanda. Haven't read it yet, so I'm unable to comment on its content. http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=47250049-814460813:1068762499806 or http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/backups_amanda.html Not a bad article...very straight-forward. It even walks you through creating a package for Solaris. The only thing I might have recommended different would've been to split out the tapetype, dumptypes and interfaces into separate files and 'include'd them in the main config file rather than keeping a monolithic conf file. That would make for cleaner config files since the info you would tend to reuse between configs would be in a central location...plus it would allow you to update the files once instead of however many config files you had...but that's just me... gonna add this link to my Amanda links. =G=
