setting up

2001-07-20 Thread Joseph McDonald
is there a way to setup amanda to do a full backup say every week to a tape drive, and do incremental backups to a hard disk storage?

Re: amdump taking a long time

2001-07-20 Thread Gerhard den Hollander
* John R. Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 10:53:03PM -0500) The Apollo fails to return an estimate and fails to backup. The estimates are taking about 6hrs to complete. ... Ick. I'm sure that's because GNU tar does not perform estimates as fast as ufsdump can. One

Re: Error: [Request to client timed out.] Solution?

2001-07-20 Thread Christoph Sold
John R. Jackson schrieb: One of my clients does not backup. amcheck detects no error. What do I check for? First, see if it ever gets done by looking at /tmp/amanda/sendsize*debug. Also, watch for the dump process to go away. After a few hours, all the processes are have gone away. See

Re: setting up

2001-07-20 Thread Christoph Sold
Joseph McDonald schrieb: is there a way to setup amanda to do a full backup say every week to a tape drive, and do incremental backups to a hard disk storage? That's not recommended. Anaway, just use amadmin once a week (possibly out of cron) to do your full dump to tape, then have an

Re: dumper fails: data write: Invalid argument

2001-07-20 Thread Frank Strauss
Hi! Does anybody have a clue, what could be the reason for the dumper failing to write large level 0 files? The amdump file just says: driver: result time 6459.975 from dumper3: \ FAILED 03-4 [data write: Invalid argument] John What OS are you using on the tape server (holding disk)

Re: [DUMP program not available]

2001-07-20 Thread Matthew Baker
Yup, Tried this. When I first installed amanda on the client (yes I am talking about the client) dump wasn't present so I installed it using: apt-get install dump and recompiled amanda. I ran make distclean and removed config.cache before running config again. I've checked the paths for

Re: Problems with amcheck and tape labels

2001-07-20 Thread Patrick Ellis
John, I tried what you suggested and this is what I got: bash-2.02$ mt -f /dev/rst0 rewind bash-2.02$ dd if=/dev/rst0 bs=32k 0+0 records in 0+0 records out 0 bytes transferred in 14.688649 secs (0 bytes/sec) My OS is FreeBSD and I am using DAT DSS2 4Gbytes... I will be on vacation for two weeks

Problem with tape drive being the only device on a SCSI chain

2001-07-20 Thread Karl Bellve
There appears to be a bug in the way that Redhat decides to load the ST module. It checks to see if /proc/scsi/scsi is present then it checks for a tape device. The problem is that /proc/scsi/scsi doesn't exist if the tape drive is the only device on the SCSI chain. So, I manually load the ST

RE: Amrecover bug? -- Oops!

2001-07-20 Thread Oleg Mechtcheriakov
OK, it works. The reason for these strange messages was the following. In one of my attempts to rebuild the package I used the --with-udpportrange option and was cool enough to select the range above 1024. Which was not good for bsd_security_ok in security.c. And after that I didn't clean the

Unexpected error estimating filesystem size

2001-07-20 Thread Jan Boshoff
Hi everyone I've been using Amanda now for about 2 months to back up 5 Unix machines with great success. It's a wonderful tool that makes life s much easier for a time-strapped grad student. I'm running Amanda 2.4.1p1 on Irix 6.5.11. Over the last week or so, amdump has not been able to

Re: [DUMP program not available]

2001-07-20 Thread Matthew Baker
Yes. The main problem exists when I run `amcheck -c config` from the tape host (a different box), all looks fine on the client. Matt - Original Message - From: Jolet, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Matthew Baker' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 2:34 PM Subject: RE: [DUMP

Re: Unexpected error estimating filesystem size

2001-07-20 Thread C. Chan
Also Sprach Jan Boshoff: Hi everyone I've been using Amanda now for about 2 months to back up 5 Unix machines with great success. It's a wonderful tool that makes life s much easier for a time-strapped grad student. I'm running Amanda 2.4.1p1 on Irix 6.5.11. Over the last week or

errfile open

2001-07-20 Thread xavier
Hi all! me again :-) I got this strange message this morning from amreport.: === These dumps were to tape Day11. The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Day01. FAILURE AND STRANGE DUMP SUMMARY: San/dev/sd0j lev 0 FAILED [errfile open

Re: amdump taking a long time

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
calcsize does all 3 estimates in one go ... But it does not support exclusion patterns. That's the one major thing holding me back from supporting it. Now if someone wants to figure out how to link calcsize with the GNU tar pattern matching code ... :-) Gerhard John R. Jackson,

Re: Error: [Request to client timed out.] Solution?

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
Comparing this to the total number of filesystems, sendsize is outrageously slow. Any idea why? ... Anyhow, may this be related in any way with the error message in ... killpgrp: debug 1 pid 45070 ruid 1003 ... /usr/local/libexec/amanda/killpgrp: version 2.4.2p2 error [must be invoked by

Re: dumper fails: data write: Invalid argument

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
It's a Solaris 2.5.1 box. I didn't specify any chunksize, so my thinking was that the default of 1 Gb is fine. It should have been. You might set it explicitly just to be sure. You might also check the ulimit values (and maybe the disk quota) for your Amanda user to make sure you're not

Re: Problems with amcheck and tape labels

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
I tried what you suggested and this is what I got: bash-2.02$ mt -f /dev/rst0 rewind bash-2.02$ dd if=/dev/rst0 bs=32k 0+0 records in 0+0 records out OK, that says the tape is empty. It's as though someone did: mt -f /dev/nrst0 rewind mt -f /dev/nrst0 eof BTW, you should use /dev/nrst0,

Re: errfile open

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
Hi all! me again :-) Hello, again :-). San/dev/sd0j lev 0 FAILED [errfile open /tmp/amanda/San._dev_sd0j.0.err out: No such file or directory] This comes from dumper **on the tape server machine**. It tried to do a simple create of that file and got back an error. About the only way

Estimates taking a long time.

2001-07-20 Thread Colin Smith
I'm running backups on 3 Linux systems, one of the systems is a Cobalt Qube. All the backups are done using GNU tar. It works OK but the estimation time on the backups is nasty. I think I'll turn off the estimation and just run full dumps every day. The Qube is the slow system with the problem

Re: Estimates taking a long time.

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
My question is this. Why run a separate estimate at all? Why not just monitor the last couple of backups and extrapolate? That's been suggested before, but nobody has had the time to work on it. It should probably be a dumptype option. I'm perfectly happy with the way estimates are done on my

Re: amdump

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
spindletop 46% ./amdump DailySet1 amdump: must be run as user backup spindletop 47% whoami backup what's the meaning of this? That you're not who you think you are? :-) It's harder than you think for a script to find out who it is running as, and amdump used to have problems with this. You

Re: Estimates taking a long time.

2001-07-20 Thread Jason Brooks
Wow! I was just going to write about this. I have just turned on gnutar backups. I noticed that the estimates are basically tar operations with all of the ouput going to /dev/null. That is what's taking the time. Not to get the file's size, but to move the date through that system pipe into

xfsdump estimates sometimes fail

2001-07-20 Thread Bernhard R. Erdmann
Hi, on a particular host (Linux 2.4.6-prexy-xfs, RH 7.1 + LVM + XFS, Amanda 2.4.2p2) sometimes sendsize fails to estimate sizes with xfsdump. If it fails, it's always /var/spool/news and /var/spool/squid. /tmp/amanda/sendsize lists xfsdump: estimated dump size: xy bytes. Other filesystems like

Re: Estimates taking a long time.

2001-07-20 Thread John R. Jackson
... I noticed that the estimates are basically tar operations with all of the ouput going to /dev/null. That is what's taking the time. Not to get the file's size, but to move the date through that system pipe into /dev/null. Nope. Tar knows it is writing to /dev/null and optimizes out the