Can't label tapes. slot 1: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) [SOLVED]
Hi all, i am having this error, couldn't find the solution even through google and mail achives, and found the solution by trial and error. Just in case someone else has this error and since this mailing list is archived it's nice to have it in here. :-) and sorry for being rude on the test mail. i just subscribed, and majordomo is slow to reply. As "amanda" user, just do this to recreate and relabel your slots: cd /space/vtapes/DailySet1/slots mkdir -p /space/vtapes/DailySet1/slots for ((i=1; $i<=25; i++)); do mkdir slot$i;done ln -s slot1 data /usr/sbin/ammt -f file:/space/vtapes/DailySet1/slots status rm /etc/amanda/DailySet1/tapelist touch /etc/amanda/DailySet1/tapelist chown amanda:disk /etc/amanda/DailySet1/tapelist* for ((i=1; $i<=9;i++)); do /usr/sbin/amlabel DailySet1 DailySet1-0$i slot $i; done /usr/sbin/amtape DailySet1 reset BEFORE: -bash-3.2$ /usr/sbin/amcheck DailySet1 Amanda Tape Server Host Check - Holding disk /dumps/amanda: 107930892 KB disk space available, using 107828492 KB slot 15: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 16: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 17: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 18: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 19: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 20: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 21: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 22: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 23: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 24: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 25: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 1: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 2: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 3: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 4: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 5: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 6: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 7: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 8: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 9: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 10: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 11: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 12: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 13: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) slot 14: not an amanda tape (Read 0 bytes) (expecting a new tape) Server check took 0.540 seconds Amanda Backup Client Hosts Check Client check: 1 host checked in 0.041 seconds, 0 problems found (brought to you by Amanda 2.5.0p2) AFTER: bash-3.2$ /usr/sbin/amcheck DailySet1 Amanda Tape Server Host Check - Holding disk /dumps/amanda: 103540220 KB disk space available, using 103437820 KB slot 3: read label `DailySet1-03', date `20090108' slot 4: read label `DailySet1-04', date `X' NOTE: skipping tape-writable test Tape DailySet1-04 label ok Server check took 0.255 seconds Amanda Backup Client Hosts Check Client check: 1 host checked in 0.126 seconds, 0 problems found (brought to you by Amanda 2.5.0p2) Regards, Zaihan
Re: amlabel: not an amanda tape ??? [ SOLVED ]
[ [ [ Anybody else seeing this?
:
204.127.192.17 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 550 [PERMFAIL] destination not valid within DNS
Giving up on 204.127.192.17. ] ] ]
Eureka!
# sudo mt -f /dev/nst0 status
SCSI 2 tape drive:
File number=0, block number=0, partition=0.
>> Tape block size 0 bytes. Density code 0x81 (DLT 15GB compressed).
Soft error count since last status=0
General status bits on (4101):
BOT ONLINE IM_REP_EN
Changed /etc/stinit.def:
manufacturer=EXABYTE model = "VXA-2" {
auto-lock
can-bsr
can-partitions
mode1 blocksize=32768 compression=0
}
Now:
# sudo mt -f /dev/nst0 status
SCSI 2 tape drive:
File number=0, block number=1, partition=0.
Tape block size 32768 bytes. Density code 0x81 (DLT 15GB compressed).
Soft error count since last status=0
General status bits on (101):
ONLINE IM_REP_EN
And:
# sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001
rewinding, reading label backup.001, tape is active
rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label, done.
* "Stefan G. Weichinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007:08:01:14:32:04+0200] scribed:
> Michael D Schleif schrieb:
> > Please, ANY ideas ???
> >
> >
> > amanda is version 2.5.1p1-2.1 , running on debian:
> >
> > # uname -a
> > Linux erda 2.6.18-4-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 26 11:36:53 CEST 2007 x86_64
> > GNU/Linux
> >
> > Trying to setup a VXA-2 manual load tape drive with amanda.
> >
> > Same tape that I used earlier today with amtapetype, and successfully
> > got a tapetype definition.
> >
> > Now, I want to label this same tape, and perform the first backup.
> >
> > # sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001
> > rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape (Invalid argument)
> > rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label
> > amlabel: not an amanda tape (Invalid argument)
> >
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> (I thought: "Should I reply or not?" ;-) )
>
> What's the definition of labelstr in your amanda.conf?
> Your label does not fit that definition.
>
> Stefan
>
--
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: amlabel: not an amanda tape ???
On 2007-08-01 14:08, Michael D Schleif wrote: Please, ANY ideas ??? amanda is version 2.5.1p1-2.1 , running on debian: # uname -a Linux erda 2.6.18-4-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 26 11:36:53 CEST 2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux Trying to setup a VXA-2 manual load tape drive with amanda. Same tape that I used earlier today with amtapetype, and successfully got a tapetype definition. Now, I want to label this same tape, and perform the first backup. # sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001 rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label amlabel: not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) What do you think? Seems that, when reading something from the tape some syscall used returns "Invalid argument". Pure guesses: - Is your tapedevice in the amanda.conf set to a real device? - Did you modify the config paramater "--with-maxtapeblocksize=..." from something other than the default value 32, which results in some weird or invalid bufferlength for such a device? (Also when using fixed blocks in the tapedevice, Amanda's buffer should be at least as large as those fixed blocks; I prefer variable blocks for tapes.) -- 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: amlabel: not an amanda tape ???
Michael D Schleif schrieb: > Please, ANY ideas ??? > > > amanda is version 2.5.1p1-2.1 , running on debian: > > # uname -a > Linux erda 2.6.18-4-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 26 11:36:53 CEST 2007 x86_64 > GNU/Linux > > Trying to setup a VXA-2 manual load tape drive with amanda. > > Same tape that I used earlier today with amtapetype, and successfully > got a tapetype definition. > > Now, I want to label this same tape, and perform the first backup. > > # sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001 > rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) > rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label > amlabel: not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) > > > What do you think? (I thought: "Should I reply or not?" ;-) ) What's the definition of labelstr in your amanda.conf? Your label does not fit that definition. Stefan
amlabel: not an amanda tape ???
Please, ANY ideas ??? amanda is version 2.5.1p1-2.1 , running on debian: # uname -a Linux erda 2.6.18-4-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 26 11:36:53 CEST 2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux Trying to setup a VXA-2 manual load tape drive with amanda. Same tape that I used earlier today with amtapetype, and successfully got a tapetype definition. Now, I want to label this same tape, and perform the first backup. # sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001 rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label amlabel: not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) 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
amlabel: amlabel: not an amanda tape ???
amanda is version 2.5.1p1-2.1 , running on debian: # uname -a Linux erda 2.6.18-4-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 26 11:36:53 CEST 2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux Trying to setup a VXA-2 manual load tape drive with amanda. Same tape that I used earlier today with amtapetype, and successfully got a tapetype definition. Now, I want to label this same tape, and perform the first backup. # sudo -u backup amlabel -f DailySet1 backup.001 rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) rewinding, writing label backup.001, checking label amlabel: not an amanda tape (Invalid argument) 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: not an amanda tape - but it was
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 04:34:19PM +1000, Rebecca Dridan wrote: > I hope someone can help me with an odd amanda problem. I've searched the > net and archives, but haven't seen anyone else with this problem yet. > > Last week I had a fully working Amanda setup on a BSD server, with a > daily and a weekly set of tapes. This week, when I put the next tape in, > and run amcheck daily, I get: > > ERROR: /dev/nsa0: not an amanda tape > (expecting tape Daily03 or a new tape) > > That is happening with _all_ tapes I've checked, daily or weekly. The > two sets are stored in different places and I really can't accept the > fact that they all died at the same time. The only thing that happened > between amanda working and not working is that the server was rebooted. > > I labelled a new tape, and flushed a backup to it, and that tape appears > to work, but that doesn't solve my problem of getting to my old backups, > or of whether I have to label a new set of tapes every time the server > is rebooted. Does anyone have any ideas what to look for? Even dd is not > finding anything on the old tapes, making me scared to check too many of > them, in case the act of checking them is in some way wiping them > > Hope someone can give me a clue. You've eliminated most of my first guesses, hardware, environment, ... I'm left looking at that reboot, and possibly a power cycle affecting the settings on the tape drive. Perhaps the tape drive has a default block size which had been changed when the old tapes were used? You say dd did not find anything? Can you be more specific about your testing with dd? It should be safe as long as you don't use "of=your_tape" or "> your_tape". dd sometimes has trouble reading tapes when its own block size is smaller than the blocks on the tape. Something like "out of memory" or "insufficient space" is the message. Try some block sizes other than the default (0.5KB on my dd, much too small). Amanda probably does not go lower than 32KB. But your tape may have been set to an even larger size. The dd options are ibs= or bs=. I don't think setting it too large is a problem. Perhaps try bs=1024K right away. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: not an amanda tape - but it was
--On Wednesday, June 29, 2005 16:34:19 +1000 Rebecca Dridan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hope someone can help me with an odd amanda problem. I've searched the net > and archives, but haven't seen anyone else with this problem yet. > > Last week I had a fully working Amanda setup on a BSD server, with a daily > and a weekly set of tapes. This week, when I put the next tape in, and run > amcheck daily, I get: > > ERROR: /dev/nsa0: not an amanda tape >(expecting tape Daily03 or a new tape) > > That is happening with _all_ tapes I've checked, daily or weekly. The two > sets are stored in different places and I really can't accept the fact that > they all died at the same time. The only thing that happened between amanda > working and not working > is that the server was rebooted. > > I labelled a new tape, and flushed a backup to it, and that tape appears to > work, but that doesn't solve my problem of getting to my old backups, or of > whether I have to label a new set of tapes every time the server is rebooted. > Does anyone have any > ideas what to look for? Even dd is not finding anything on the old tapes, > making me scared to check too many of them, in case the act of checking them > is in some way wiping them Very strange... Can you read the new tape you just used? Are there any errors in the Amanda debug logs or the system logs? Are you sure you're actually using a tape and /dev/nsa0 didn't get converted from a device to a plain file? Does an mt command actually do something with the tape (can you rewind and eject it)? A dd of your tape shouldn't hurt it, but it's always safest to use the write-protect tab in case you get your if= and of= accidentally reversed. If you rewind the tape, and dd a record off of it, what exactly do you get? Frank > > Hope someone can give me a clue. > > Rebecca -- Frank Smith[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Systems Administrator Voice: 512-374-4673 Hoover's Online Fax: 512-374-4501
not an amanda tape - but it was
I hope someone can help me with an odd amanda problem. I've searched the net and archives, but haven't seen anyone else with this problem yet. Last week I had a fully working Amanda setup on a BSD server, with a daily and a weekly set of tapes. This week, when I put the next tape in, and run amcheck daily, I get: ERROR: /dev/nsa0: not an amanda tape (expecting tape Daily03 or a new tape) That is happening with _all_ tapes I've checked, daily or weekly. The two sets are stored in different places and I really can't accept the fact that they all died at the same time. The only thing that happened between amanda working and not working is that the server was rebooted. I labelled a new tape, and flushed a backup to it, and that tape appears to work, but that doesn't solve my problem of getting to my old backups, or of whether I have to label a new set of tapes every time the server is rebooted. Does anyone have any ideas what to look for? Even dd is not finding anything on the old tapes, making me scared to check too many of them, in case the act of checking them is in some way wiping them Hope someone can give me a clue. Rebecca
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
On Friday 30 April 2004 10:57, James D. Freels wrote:
>OK. Stranger by the minute. I removed the first tape (01) and set
> it up to use the second tape(02). I issued a "amcheck fea" and it
> said my second tape was OK and that I should be able to backup. I
> then issued an amflush and it came back with an error. I then
> rewind the tape with "mt rewind", turn around and issue another
> amcheck fea, and the tape has an error on it. So, the amflush
> and/or amdump process is writing something to the tape that causes
> it to not be usable after that point.
>
>Is this sounding like a scsi error or some type ?
Possibly. Sometimes people forget that a scsi bus is a transmission
line, and as such is subject to echo's and other symptoms of vswr if
not properly terminated ON BOTH ENDS of the cable and ONLY AT THE
ENDS. Even 6" of cable hanging free and unused at the end of the
cable and all bets are off. You can sacrifice all the virgin
chickens in the hen house without fixing it in that case.
Term power should be jumpered such that the card is supplying it, even
in the tape drive if that can be arraigned. Most cards furnish this
thru an isolation diode, but if the diode isn't a schotkey, but is a
silicon diode, the .70 volt drop is too much. If the drive is
mounted internally to the server, then this diode on the controller
card should be removed and a jumper installed in its place, but don't
do this if the power supply isn't common, as would be the case for an
externally mounted drive/changer/robot.
>On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:49, James D. Freels wrote:
>> Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued
>> the amlabel command and receive a
>>
>> rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
>> rewinding, writing label fea01
>> amlabel: writing label: Input/output error
>>
>>
>> Could I have a hard ware error of some kind ? I just rebooted the
>> system to make sure it was not that. Just yesterday I labeled 25
>> tapes !!
>>
>> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:07, James D. Freels wrote:
>> > Hello Amanda-Users !
>> >
>> > I have duplicated my previous amanda backup setup from an
>> > existing machine to a new machine. The new machine has a
>> > different tape drive which I changed the tapetype entry in
>> > amanda.conf to:
>> >
>> > define tapetype TDK-DC4-150 {
>> > comment "Seagate Scorpion 40 drive with DSS-4 tape and
>> > compression" length 3 mbytes
>> > filemark1 kbytes
>> > speed4800 kps
>> > }
>> >
>> > All other entries are the same.
>> >
>> > I have also labeled new tapes for this tape drive.
>> >
>> > The amcheck says the tape label is good and is the next tape to
>> > be used in the backup. The amcheckdb and amadmin configid tape
>> > commands all indicate everything is working OK.
>> >
>> > An amdump works by sending all backup files to the holding disk.
>> >
>> > However, I receive the error message shown in the subject line
>> > and repeated here for both the amdump and amflush commands.
>> >
>> > from the amflush log files:
>> >
>> > driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda
>> > tape]
>> >
>> > from the amdump log files:
>> >
>> > driver: result time 326.960 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [writing
>> > label: Input/output error]
>> >
>> > from the log. files of the amdump run:
>> >
>> > ERROR taper no-tape [writing label: Input/output error]
>> >
>> > from the log. files of the amflush run:
>> >
>> > ERROR taper no-tape [not an amanda tape]
>> >
>> > The amtapetype ran OK.
>> >
>> > The tar command runs OK completely independent of amanda to
>> > backup files to tape that way so I know the tape drive works OK.
>> > This machine is a dual-Xeon running Linux 2.4.26 on the
>> > Debian/Woody/Stable distribution with plenty of memory, etc.
--
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)
99.22% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
On Friday 30 April 2004 10:49, James D. Freels wrote:
>Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued the
>amlabel command and receive a
>
>rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
>rewinding, writing label fea01
>amlabel: writing label: Input/output error
>
>
>Could I have a hard ware error of some kind ? I just rebooted the
>system to make sure it was not that. Just yesterday I labeled 25
> tapes !!
>
Verify each tape has the right header on it with this non-amanda
sequence:
1. load the tape, which should leave it at BOT when its been
recognized by the drive.
2. prompt#> dd if=/dev/st0ENTER
This should spit out to the screen, the first block of the tape which
contains the label followed by a date string that amanda doesn't yet
use (that I know of). The label string should be what you had
amlabel write to it, and the date string should match the date the
label was last written. Note that this IS updated when amanda uses a
tape.
3. Since we used the "rewind on close" /dev/st0 entry or whatever it
is on your system, the tape should be rewound and you can do it again
if you'd like.
4. issue whatever commands it takes to make the tape label match, and
goto #2 if corrective action was taken.
5. eject that tape and insert the next one
6. goto 2.
When done, if you had to rewrite labels, go remove any duplicates in
the /config_name/tapelist to prevent amanda from getting confused.
>On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:07, James D. Freels wrote:
>> Hello Amanda-Users !
>>
>> I have duplicated my previous amanda backup setup from an existing
>> machine to a new machine. The new machine has a different tape
>> drive which I changed the tapetype entry in amanda.conf to:
>>
>> define tapetype TDK-DC4-150 {
>> comment "Seagate Scorpion 40 drive with DSS-4 tape and
>> compression" length 3 mbytes
>> filemark1 kbytes
>> speed4800 kps
>> }
>>
>> All other entries are the same.
>>
>> I have also labeled new tapes for this tape drive.
>>
>> The amcheck says the tape label is good and is the next tape to be
>> used in the backup. The amcheckdb and amadmin configid tape
>> commands all indicate everything is working OK.
>>
>> An amdump works by sending all backup files to the holding disk.
>>
>> However, I receive the error message shown in the subject line and
>> repeated here for both the amdump and amflush commands.
>>
>> from the amflush log files:
>>
>> driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda
>> tape]
>>
>> from the amdump log files:
>>
>> driver: result time 326.960 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [writing label:
>> Input/output error]
>>
>> from the log. files of the amdump run:
>>
>> ERROR taper no-tape [writing label: Input/output error]
>>
>> from the log. files of the amflush run:
>>
>> ERROR taper no-tape [not an amanda tape]
>>
>> The amtapetype ran OK.
>>
>> The tar command runs OK completely independent of amanda to backup
>> files to tape that way so I know the tape drive works OK. This
>> machine is a dual-Xeon running Linux 2.4.26 on the
>> Debian/Woody/Stable distribution with plenty of memory, etc.
--
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)
99.22% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
OK. I changed the blocksize to fixed at 32768 and sure enough, I was able to flush. I will now go back and make things more generic as you suggest to a blocksize of 0 for variable. I also looked at all the info you referenced on this problem before and using the stinit.def file to define the tape parameters on bootup. This would also be good. Now the question: I will have to go back and relabel all those tapes, no ? And to Jon, yes I was using /dev/nst0 for Amanda, and /dev/st0 for the mt test. Incidently, there is a read/write tester (binary executable) delivered with this tape drive (Seagate Scorpion 40) specifically written for Linux. It worked pretty well to establish that the tape drive was working as expected. This is why I suspected an AMANDA setup problem. Amazing...all these years of using AMANDA I never ran up on this problem before. On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 11:39, Paul Bijnens wrote: > This has fixed blocks of 512 bytes. > I never understood why this is the default value on some configs. > It works better if you set variable blocksize, indicated by 0 bytes. > > I never exactly understood the boundary cases, but it seems > that each OS has it's own semantics when reading blocks from tape. -- James D. Freels, Ph.D. Oak Ridge National Laboratory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
Hello, and thank you for your email. I shall be out of the office until Tuesday 4th May. Should your email require urgent attention, the please contact David Adams or email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, William Hargrove
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 11:15:49AM -0400, James D. Freels wrote: > Now I had to use another tape in the sequence. > > the 2st "mt -f /dev/st0" before amcheck or amflush: You were asked if you are using the NON-rewind tape device but never responded. I think this is the rewind on close device. You probably should be using something like /dev/nst0. ^ -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
James D. Freels wrote: Now I had to use another tape in the sequence. the 2st "mt -f /dev/st0" before amcheck or amflush: drive type = Generic SCSI-2 tape drive status = 637534720 sense key error = 0 residue count = 0 file number = 0 block number = 0 Tape block size 512 bytes. Density code 0x26 (unknown). This has fixed blocks of 512 bytes. I never understood why this is the default value on some configs. It works better if you set variable blocksize, indicated by 0 bytes. I never exactly understood the boundary cases, but it seems that each OS has it's own semantics when reading blocks from tape. Suppose - You have a readbuffer of e.g. 32K - You read from a fixed-block-512bytes tape Some OS's read one block of 512 bytes only, Some other OS's read many blocks to fill as much as possible in 32 Kbyte buffer; and there are differences in the handling of the last block if it does not fit exactly in the buffer too. When writing, a 32 Kbyte buffer is spread over multiple 512 blocks (on all systems I tested). The two portable ways on each OS are: - read/write with the same blocksize as the tape is configured - read/write in variable blocksize, and make sure you read with a blocksize that is an exact multiple of the tape, and be prepared to get less in one read call. In both cases, be prepared to handle the last impartial block. Amanda uses a default blocksize of 32Kbytes. If you set variable blocking and let amanda read/write the tapes, it "just works". See also: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=amanda-users&m=105605554715698&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=amanda-users&m=106560034410682&w=2 The tape drive has compression on according to the tapetype. Could this be the cause somehow ? No, not this problem, but on a DDS-4 tape you better have compression off, unless you have a slow computer and NEED hardware compression to get the backup done in time without too much load. The pros and cons of hardware compression have been discussed a zillion times on this list. Search the archive and the FAQ's. -- 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: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
Now I had to use another tape in the sequence. the 2st "mt -f /dev/st0" before amcheck or amflush: drive type = Generic SCSI-2 tape drive status = 637534720 sense key error = 0 residue count = 0 file number = 0 block number = 0 Tape block size 512 bytes. Density code 0x26 (unknown). Soft error count since last status=0 General status bits on (4101): BOT ONLINE IM_REP_EN the 2nd "mt -f /dev/st0" after the amcheck drive type = Generic SCSI-2 tape drive status = 637534720 sense key error = 0 residue count = 0 file number = 0 block number = 0 Tape block size 512 bytes. Density code 0x26 (unknown). Soft error count since last status=0 General status bits on (4101): BOT ONLINE IM_REP_EN the 3rd "mt -f /dev/st0" after the amflush (also did an mt rewind) drive type = Generic SCSI-2 tape drive status = 637534720 sense key error = 0 residue count = 0 file number = 0 block number = 0 Tape block size 512 bytes. Density code 0x26 (unknown). Soft error count since last status=0 General status bits on (4101): BOT ONLINE IM_REP_EN So, all is the same it appears. I was hoping you had something here. If it were a scsi error, I don't think the clean tapes would recognize the label. The label is not recognized after the amflush. The tape drive has compression on according to the tapetype. Could this be the cause somehow ? On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 11:02, Paul Bijnens wrote: > James D. Freels wrote: > > > OK. Stranger by the minute. I removed the first tape (01) and set it > > up to use the second tape(02). I issued a "amcheck fea" and it said my > > second tape was OK and that I should be able to backup. I then issued > > an amflush and it came back with an error. I then rewind the tape with > > "mt rewind", turn around and issue another amcheck fea, and the tape has > > an error on it. So, the amflush and/or amdump process is writing > > something to the tape that causes it to not be usable after that point. > > Try "mt -f /dev/st0 status" before and after the amcheck and after the > flush. > Any difference? -- James D. Freels, Ph.D. Oak Ridge National Laboratory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
James D. Freels wrote: OK. Stranger by the minute. I removed the first tape (01) and set it up to use the second tape(02). I issued a "amcheck fea" and it said my second tape was OK and that I should be able to backup. I then issued an amflush and it came back with an error. I then rewind the tape with "mt rewind", turn around and issue another amcheck fea, and the tape has an error on it. So, the amflush and/or amdump process is writing something to the tape that causes it to not be usable after that point. Try "mt -f /dev/st0 status" before and after the amcheck and after the flush. Any difference? -- 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: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
I am writing to the non-rewinding device as always, /dev/nts0. If I changed the blocksize, how would I have done so ? If I have the incorrect tapetype, will this do it ? How can I correct the blocksizes, etc. ? On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:56, Paul Bijnens wrote: > James D. Freels wrote: > > > Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued the > > amlabel command and receive a > > > > rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape > > rewinding, writing label fea01 > > amlabel: writing label: Input/output error > > Do you have the NON-rewinding device in amanda.conf ? > Accidently changed the blocksize of the device? -- James D. Freels, Ph.D. Oak Ridge National Laboratory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
OK. Stranger by the minute. I removed the first tape (01) and set it
up to use the second tape(02). I issued a "amcheck fea" and it said my
second tape was OK and that I should be able to backup. I then issued
an amflush and it came back with an error. I then rewind the tape with
"mt rewind", turn around and issue another amcheck fea, and the tape has
an error on it. So, the amflush and/or amdump process is writing
something to the tape that causes it to not be usable after that point.
Is this sounding like a scsi error or some type ?
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:49, James D. Freels wrote:
> Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued the
> amlabel command and receive a
>
> rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
> rewinding, writing label fea01
> amlabel: writing label: Input/output error
>
>
> Could I have a hard ware error of some kind ? I just rebooted the
> system to make sure it was not that. Just yesterday I labeled 25 tapes
> !!
>
> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:07, James D. Freels wrote:
> > Hello Amanda-Users !
> >
> > I have duplicated my previous amanda backup setup from an existing
> > machine to a new machine. The new machine has a different tape drive
> > which I changed the tapetype entry in amanda.conf to:
> >
> > define tapetype TDK-DC4-150 {
> > comment "Seagate Scorpion 40 drive with DSS-4 tape and compression"
> > length 3 mbytes
> > filemark1 kbytes
> > speed4800 kps
> > }
> >
> > All other entries are the same.
> >
> > I have also labeled new tapes for this tape drive.
> >
> > The amcheck says the tape label is good and is the next tape to be used
> > in the backup. The amcheckdb and amadmin configid tape commands all
> > indicate everything is working OK.
> >
> > An amdump works by sending all backup files to the holding disk.
> >
> > However, I receive the error message shown in the subject line and
> > repeated here for both the amdump and amflush commands.
> >
> > from the amflush log files:
> >
> > driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
> >
> > from the amdump log files:
> >
> > driver: result time 326.960 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [writing label:
> > Input/output error]
> >
> > from the log. files of the amdump run:
> >
> > ERROR taper no-tape [writing label: Input/output error]
> >
> > from the log. files of the amflush run:
> >
> > ERROR taper no-tape [not an amanda tape]
> >
> > The amtapetype ran OK.
> >
> > The tar command runs OK completely independent of amanda to backup files
> > to tape that way so I know the tape drive works OK. This machine is a
> > dual-Xeon running Linux 2.4.26 on the Debian/Woody/Stable distribution
> > with plenty of memory, etc.
--
James D. Freels, Ph.D.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
James D. Freels wrote: Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued the amlabel command and receive a rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape rewinding, writing label fea01 amlabel: writing label: Input/output error Do you have the NON-rewinding device in amanda.conf ? Accidently changed the blocksize of the device? -- 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: driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
Whoa ! Now I am going back to relabel my tapes. I have issued the
amlabel command and receive a
rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
rewinding, writing label fea01
amlabel: writing label: Input/output error
Could I have a hard ware error of some kind ? I just rebooted the
system to make sure it was not that. Just yesterday I labeled 25 tapes
!!
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:07, James D. Freels wrote:
> Hello Amanda-Users !
>
> I have duplicated my previous amanda backup setup from an existing
> machine to a new machine. The new machine has a different tape drive
> which I changed the tapetype entry in amanda.conf to:
>
> define tapetype TDK-DC4-150 {
> comment "Seagate Scorpion 40 drive with DSS-4 tape and compression"
> length 3 mbytes
> filemark1 kbytes
> speed4800 kps
> }
>
> All other entries are the same.
>
> I have also labeled new tapes for this tape drive.
>
> The amcheck says the tape label is good and is the next tape to be used
> in the backup. The amcheckdb and amadmin configid tape commands all
> indicate everything is working OK.
>
> An amdump works by sending all backup files to the holding disk.
>
> However, I receive the error message shown in the subject line and
> repeated here for both the amdump and amflush commands.
>
> from the amflush log files:
>
> driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
>
> from the amdump log files:
>
> driver: result time 326.960 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [writing label:
> Input/output error]
>
> from the log. files of the amdump run:
>
> ERROR taper no-tape [writing label: Input/output error]
>
> from the log. files of the amflush run:
>
> ERROR taper no-tape [not an amanda tape]
>
> The amtapetype ran OK.
>
> The tar command runs OK completely independent of amanda to backup files
> to tape that way so I know the tape drive works OK. This machine is a
> dual-Xeon running Linux 2.4.26 on the Debian/Woody/Stable distribution
> with plenty of memory, etc.
--
James D. Freels, Ph.D.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
Hello Amanda-Users !
I have duplicated my previous amanda backup setup from an existing
machine to a new machine. The new machine has a different tape drive
which I changed the tapetype entry in amanda.conf to:
define tapetype TDK-DC4-150 {
comment "Seagate Scorpion 40 drive with DSS-4 tape and compression"
length 3 mbytes
filemark1 kbytes
speed4800 kps
}
All other entries are the same.
I have also labeled new tapes for this tape drive.
The amcheck says the tape label is good and is the next tape to be used
in the backup. The amcheckdb and amadmin configid tape commands all
indicate everything is working OK.
An amdump works by sending all backup files to the holding disk.
However, I receive the error message shown in the subject line and
repeated here for both the amdump and amflush commands.
from the amflush log files:
driver: result time 0.022 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [not an amanda tape]
from the amdump log files:
driver: result time 326.960 from taper: TAPE-ERROR [writing label:
Input/output error]
from the log. files of the amdump run:
ERROR taper no-tape [writing label: Input/output error]
from the log. files of the amflush run:
ERROR taper no-tape [not an amanda tape]
The amtapetype ran OK.
The tar command runs OK completely independent of amanda to backup files
to tape that way so I know the tape drive works OK. This machine is a
dual-Xeon running Linux 2.4.26 on the Debian/Woody/Stable distribution
with plenty of memory, etc.
--
James D. Freels, Ph.D.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: not an amanda tape
On Thursday 19 June 2003 14:41, Tom Brown wrote: >> I also have such a situation! >> >> if I try to relabel it, it say that the tape is already labeled. >> But this > >is > >> probably >> read from tapelist file and not really from the tape. >> >> version 2.4.4-20030605 >> chg-zd-mtx > >i have a theory to my problem but not 100% certain yet. > >i have, today, run a amtapetype on the drive. I suspect this process >overwrote the label on the tape. Yes it did. > I suspect this as i did an amlabel > on a tape in a different system ysterday and today did an > amtapetype. Guess what i then did an amtape config show and i got > 'not an amanda tape' The label must actually match the amanda maintained list I believe. But, there is little to prevent you from useing the -f option, which forces the label to be written anyway. >in my case i suspect operator error (again!) > >Tom Maybe. :) -- Cheers, Gene AMD [EMAIL PROTECTED] 320M [EMAIL PROTECTED] 512M 99.26% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: not an amanda tape
> I also have such a situation! > > if I try to relabel it, it say that the tape is already labeled. But this is > probably > read from tapelist file and not really from the tape. > > version 2.4.4-20030605 > chg-zd-mtx i have a theory to my problem but not 100% certain yet. i have, today, run a amtapetype on the drive. I suspect this process overwrote the label on the tape. I suspect this as i did an amlabel on a tape in a different system ysterday and today did an amtapetype. Guess what i then did an amtape config show and i got 'not an amanda tape' in my case i suspect operator error (again!) Tom
RE: not an amanda tape
I also have such a situation! if I try to relabel it, it say that the tape is already labeled. But this is probably read from tapelist file and not really from the tape. version 2.4.4-20030605 chg-zd-mtx regards, gregor
Re: not an amanda tape
> Was that the tape in the drive when you did your tapetypes? ahhh - erm i can't remember actually yes i can and no it wasn't - the last tape was as... amcheck-server: slot 7: date 20030618 label gthost07 (first labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 1: not an amanda tape the tape 07 was read first Tom
Re: not an amanda tape
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 04:55:11PM +0100, Tom Brown wrote: > I've got a bit of a strage issue here. All tapes have been labelled and i > did a couple of test runs with all disks in the disklist commented out so it > just ran through its cycle and all 7 tapes were fine. > > that was yesterday > > today doing an amcheck i am told that tape01 is not am amanda tape when it > is. It was labelled but when i queried the tape today it had gone! > > has anyone ever seen this before or offer any idea why a label might just > get deleted? Was that the tape in the drive when you did your tapetypes? -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
not an amanda tape
I've got a bit of a strage issue here. All tapes have been labelled and i did a couple of test runs with all disks in the disklist commented out so it just ran through its cycle and all 7 tapes were fine. that was yesterday today doing an amcheck i am told that tape01 is not am amanda tape when it is. It was labelled but when i queried the tape today it had gone! has anyone ever seen this before or offer any idea why a label might just get deleted? Tom $ amcheck gt-host Amanda Tape Server Host Check - Holding disk /var/spool/amanda: 13925552 KB disk space available, that's plenty amcheck-server: slot 7: date 20030618 label gthost07 (first labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 1: not an amanda tape amcheck-server: slot 2: date 20030618 label gthost02 (labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 3: date 20030618 label gthost03 (labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 4: date 20030618 label gthost04 (labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 5: date 20030618 label gthost05 (labelstr match) amcheck-server: slot 6: date 20030618 label gthost06 (labelstr match) and i have since labelled it again fine? $ amtape gt-host current amtape: scanning current slot in tape-changer rack: slot 1: date Xlabel gthost01
Re: 'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Toomas Aas wrote: > > From: Scott Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:15:52AM +0200, Toomas Aas wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the > > > operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is > > > really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since > > > the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written > > > before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". > > > > > > After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and > > > > Could the compression bit have been toggled in you tape drive? > > This doesn't seem to be the case. I checked after loading the next tape > today and the compression settings are what they've always been. > > Also, (say hello to mr. Murphy) the problem doesn't seem to exist at > all with todays tape. After loading it I checked the Amanda label with > dd as recommended by Gerhard den Hollander in another message and it > looked OK. Amcheck was also happy with the tape. Maybe it was just some > weird random problem with a couple of tapes. > -- > Toomas Aas | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.raad.tartu.ee/~toomas/ > * War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left. > The weirdest thing - my problem disappeared too in few tapes. Maybe it has something to do with the amcheck ran before amdump (but that does not explain why the problem disappeared at all, even for tapes that did not get amchecked before amdump). So as far as i can see - running amcheck once eliminates the problem for ever. :| Laas Toom
Re: 'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
> From: Scott Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:15:52AM +0200, Toomas Aas wrote: > > Hello! > > > > My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the > > operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is > > really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since > > the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written > > before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". > > > > After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and > > Could the compression bit have been toggled in you tape drive? This doesn't seem to be the case. I checked after loading the next tape today and the compression settings are what they've always been. Also, (say hello to mr. Murphy) the problem doesn't seem to exist at all with todays tape. After loading it I checked the Amanda label with dd as recommended by Gerhard den Hollander in another message and it looked OK. Amcheck was also happy with the tape. Maybe it was just some weird random problem with a couple of tapes. -- Toomas Aas | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.raad.tartu.ee/~toomas/ * War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
Re: 'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:15:52AM +0200, Toomas Aas wrote: > Hello! > > My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the > operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is > really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since > the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written > before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". > > After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and Could the compression bit have been toggled in you tape drive? -- Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
I have the same problem with my amanda 2.4.3 (FreeBSD 4.7) I upgraded my FreeBSD ports collection and to upgrade KDE 3.0 -> 3.1 and didn't think of this as a major upgrade (that would affect my systems stability) and therefore have no numbers or anything to bring here for information. But come to think of it, exactly from the point when i upgraded, i'm getting these messages. At first i thought that my one of my tapes is buggy and erased it before relabeling and running amflush. Now second one failed. That made me curious... i was firightened that all of my tapes are ruined (by some magnetic smth or what ever) as they are all in one place. After flushing this tape i put in next one and ran amcheck (i didn't think of this as a sticky problem in the first place and hoped only one of my tapes was problematic therefore didn't precheck previous tapes). Amcheck ran fine and without any errors... i'll find out tomorrow, if amdump also has no errors. Also i can restore from the tape written before upgrade (at least when using dummy hostname amrestore lists all files, I did not try actual restore) If the problem persists, i dig further more into it, so far this is ment as information that this problem has occured elsewere too. Laas Toom Now i put a next tape in and run am On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Toomas Aas wrote: > Hello! > > My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the > operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is > really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since > the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written > before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". > > After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and > also I can successfully amrestore it later. But it seems that, should > the need arise to restore from a pre-upgrade tape, I would be in > trouble because those tapes are 'not Amanda tapes'. I suppose I could > still read the dump images with dd, though? > > Over the last couple of years I've done many OS upgrades on this Amanda > server and this is the first time I see such problem. Has anyone else > seen it? > -- > Toomas Aas | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.raad.tartu.ee/~toomas/ > * It's always darkest right before you step on the cat. >
Re: 'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
* Toomas Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:15:52AM +0200) > Hello! > > My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the > operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is > really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since > the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written > before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". > > After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and > also I can successfully amrestore it later. But it seems that, should > the need arise to restore from a pre-upgrade tape, I would be in > trouble because those tapes are 'not Amanda tapes'. I suppose I could > still read the dump images with dd, though? > > Over the last couple of years I've done many OS upgrades on this Amanda > server and this is the first time I see such problem. Has anyone else > seen it? IIRC amanda checks the tapelabel by basically doing dd if=/dev/tape bs=32k count=1 If you do this manually, what comes back ? It sounds like some default setting for your tapedevice has changed. Kind regards, -- Gerhard den Hollander Phone :+31-10.280.1515 Global IT Support manager Direct:+31-10.280.1539 Jason Geosystems BV Fax :+31-10.280.1511 (When calling please note: we are in GMT+1) [EMAIL PROTECTED] POBox 1573 visit us at http://www.jasongeo.com 3000 BN Rotterdam JASON...#1 in Reservoir CharacterizationThe Netherlands This e-mail and any attachment is/are intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, we request that you do not disseminate, forward, distribute or copy this e-mail message. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and destroy the original message.
'not an Amanda tape' after FreeBSD upgrade
Hello! My Amanda server is running 2.4.3b4. Three days ago I upgraded the operating system from FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p6 to 4.7-RELEASE-p9. This is really just some security patches to sendmail, libc and openssl. Since the upgrade Amanda thinks that all the backup tapes that were written before the upgrade are "not Amanda tapes". After I re-label the tape, Amanda agrees to write the backup to it and also I can successfully amrestore it later. But it seems that, should the need arise to restore from a pre-upgrade tape, I would be in trouble because those tapes are 'not Amanda tapes'. I suppose I could still read the dump images with dd, though? Over the last couple of years I've done many OS upgrades on this Amanda server and this is the first time I see such problem. Has anyone else seen it? -- Toomas Aas | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.raad.tartu.ee/~toomas/ * It's always darkest right before you step on the cat.
Re: not an amanda tape
Thanks for your response. My problem is with trying to label the tape. The drive on ide0. Have tried /dev/ht0 & /dev/nht0. Both give; no label found, are you sure tape is non-rewinding? While checking that the label was written correctly, amlabel got an error that might be caused by mis- configuring Amanda with a rewinding tape device name instead of a non-rewinding device name for tape. There is activity on the Tape Drive but the same message appears. Have scoured through the FAQ and list archives, however, I'm not sure what else to try :( -Brad > > > I had the same problem. > Before you can use a tape with amanda you have to label it with amlabel > > Look on the man page to know all the option. > > Regards, > > Arno > > > > > ** > DISCLAIMER - E-MAIL > --- > The information contained in this E-Mail is intended for the named > recipient(s). It may contain certain privileged and confidential > information, or information which is otherwise protected from > disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not > copy,distribute or take any action in reliance on this information > ** > >
Re: not an amanda tape
I had the same problem. Before you can use a tape with amanda you have to label it with amlabel Look on the man page to know all the option. Regards, Arno ** DISCLAIMER - E-MAIL --- The information contained in this E-Mail is intended for the named recipient(s). It may contain certain privileged and confidential information, or information which is otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy,distribute or take any action in reliance on this information **
not an amanda tape
I'm having trouble with labelling my tape on a Seagate STT2A (using
Travan 20GB tapes). Example below. Have tried /dev/nht0 as per FAQ with
same results.
My OS is RedHat 7.2 and RPM's installed are: amanda-server-2.4.2p2-4,
amanda-devel-2.4.2p2-4, amanda-2.4.2p2-4, amanda-client-2.4.2p2-4
What am I missing?
Have set my tapetpye in /etc/amanda/iogta/amanda.conf to;
runtapes 1 # number of tapes to be used in a single run of
amdump
tapedev "/dev/ht0" # the no-rewind tape device to be used
tapetype STT2A # what kind of tape it is (see tapetypes
below)
labelstr "^Tape[0-9][0-9]*$"# label constraint regex: all tapes must
match
define tapetype STT2A {
comment "just produced by tapetype program"
length 9500 mbytes
filemark 103 kbytes
speed 914 kbytes
}
$ /usr/sbin/amlabel iogta Tape1
rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
rewinding, writing label Tape1, checking label
amlabel: no label found, are you sure /dev/nht0 is non-rewinding?
$ /usr/sbin/amcheck iogta
Amanda Tape Server Host Check
-
Holding disk /var/tmp: 1782512 KB disk space available, that's plenty
ERROR: /dev/ht0: not an amanda tape
(expecting a new tape)
NOTE: skipping tape-writable test
Server check took 16.655 seconds
Amanda Backup Client Hosts Check
Client check: 1 host checked in 0.013 seconds, 0 problems found
(brought to you by Amanda 2.4.2p2)
-Brad
not an amanda tape???
Hello there,
I figure my last mail was less than informative - usually not my
style and I apologize.
Anyway, one problem seems to persist and I'm clueless as to what
may cause it.
So, my amanda server is a FreeBSD 4.3 STABLE machine with a
Tandberg MLR1.
amanda is version 2.4.1p1, installed from the ports.
Now, what I do is the following: I try and label a tape and
amlabel appears to do it without any complaints:
$ amlabel Hundert6 Hundert601
rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
rewinding, writing label Hundert601, done.
... however, each and every time I try it, amlabel keeps telling
me the tape is not an amanda tape.
Consequently amcheck reports the following:
ERROR: /dev/sa0: not
an amanda tape.
(expecting a new tape)
NOTE: skipping tape-writable test.
Any hint what could be causing this? I wrote the tapetype
description for the MLR1 myself, but in an earlier post someone
said it couldn't be the reason.
Tape label description should match the regexp I used
("^Hundert6[0-9][0-9]*$") - but even if it didn't it should
recognize the tape as an amanda tape, or not?
Any hints?
Bye, Jan
--
Radio HUNDERT,6 Medien GmbH Berlin
- EDV -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: not an amanda tape???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hello there,
>
> I figure my last mail was less than informative - usually not my
> style and I apologize.
>
> Anyway, one problem seems to persist and I'm clueless as to what
> may cause it.
> So, my amanda server is a FreeBSD 4.3 STABLE machine with a
> Tandberg MLR1.
> amanda is version 2.4.1p1, installed from the ports.
>
> Now, what I do is the following: I try and label a tape and
> amlabel appears to do it without any complaints:
>
> $ amlabel Hundert6 Hundert601
> rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
> rewinding, writing label Hundert601, done.
>
> ... however, each and every time I try it, amlabel keeps telling
> me the tape is not an amanda tape.
>
> Consequently amcheck reports the following:
>
> ERROR: /dev/sa0: not
> an amanda tape.
>(expecting a new tape)
> NOTE: skipping tape-writable test.
>
> Any hint what could be causing this? I wrote the tapetype
> description for the MLR1 myself, but in an earlier post someone
> said it couldn't be the reason.
>
> Tape label description should match the regexp I used
> ("^Hundert6[0-9][0-9]*$") - but even if it didn't it should
> recognize the tape as an amanda tape, or not?
>
> Any hints?
Jan,
I'd recommend to test writing and reading directly to tape first:
mt rewind
cp somebigfile /dev/nst0
mt rewind
cp /dev/nst0 /tmp/somebigfile
diff somebigfile /tmp/bigfile
This is for a Linux box, so you'll need to adjust the mt
command. /dev/nst0 is the nonrewinding device for the first SCSI
streamer. Naming will be different for BSD.
HTH,
Johannes Nieß
Re: not an amanda tape???
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 03:09:24PM +0200) > Hello there, > I figure my last mail was less than informative - usually not my > style and I apologize. > ERROR: /dev/sa0: not > an amanda tape. >(expecting a new tape) I might be wrong here, but isn't /dev/sa0 the rewind device ? Try /dev/nsa0 (or whatever is the NON-rewind device in *BSD). Currently listening to: The Pleasure Elite-Aunt Flow Gerhard, <@jasongeo.com> == The Acoustic Motorbiker == -- __O Some say the end is near. =`\<, Some say we'll see armageddon soon (=)/(=) I certainly hope we will I could use a vacation
Re: not an amanda tape???
Check tape device as well as the labelstr values. Here are mine:
tapedev "/dev/nrsa0" # the no-rewind tape device to be used
tapetype DLT1 # what kind of tape it is
labelstr "^Taeglich-[0-9][0-9]*$" # label constraint regexp: all tapes
must match
HTH
-Christoph Sold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello there,
>
> I figure my last mail was less than informative - usually not my
> style and I apologize.
>
> Anyway, one problem seems to persist and I'm clueless as to what
> may cause it.
> So, my amanda server is a FreeBSD 4.3 STABLE machine with a
> Tandberg MLR1.
> amanda is version 2.4.1p1, installed from the ports.
>
> Now, what I do is the following: I try and label a tape and
> amlabel appears to do it without any complaints:
>
> $ amlabel Hundert6 Hundert601
> rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape
> rewinding, writing label Hundert601, done.
>
> ... however, each and every time I try it, amlabel keeps telling
> me the tape is not an amanda tape.
>
> Consequently amcheck reports the following:
>
> ERROR: /dev/sa0: not
> an amanda tape.
>(expecting a new tape)
> NOTE: skipping tape-writable test.
>
> Any hint what could be causing this? I wrote the tapetype
> description for the MLR1 myself, but in an earlier post someone
> said it couldn't be the reason.
>
> Tape label description should match the regexp I used
> ("^Hundert6[0-9][0-9]*$") - but even if it didn't it should
> recognize the tape as an amanda tape, or not?
>
> Any hints?
>
> Bye, Jan
>
> --
> Radio HUNDERT,6 Medien GmbH Berlin
> - EDV -
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Freundliche Grüße aus Waiblingen
Christoph Sold
--
Systemadministrator, i-clue GmbH, Endersbacher Str. 57, 71334 Waiblingen
Fon: (0 71 51) 9 59 01-12, Fax: (0 71 51) 9 59 01-55, Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: not an amanda tape???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello there, > > I figure my last mail was less than informative - usually not my > style and I apologize. > > [snip] > > $ amlabel Hundert6 Hundert601 > rewinding, reading label, not an amanda tape > rewinding, writing label Hundert601, done. > > ... however, each and every time I try it, amlabel keeps telling > me the tape is not an amanda tape. > > Consequently amcheck reports the following: > > ERROR: /dev/sa0: not That's the rewinbding device. Use /dev/nrsa0 instead. > an amanda tape. >(expecting a new tape) > NOTE: skipping tape-writable test. HTH -Christoph Sold
Re: not an amanda tape???
Hi, > I might be wrong here, > but isn't /dev/sa0 the rewind device ? You are of course absolutely right. I guess I need a new pair of glasses. The fact that this was the problem all the time makes me want to smash my head against my monitor :-% Thanks, however. > Try /dev/nsa0 (or whatever is the NON-rewind device in *BSD). Works just fine... Cheers, Jan -- Radio HUNDERT,6 Medien GmbH Berlin - EDV - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
