Re: Multiple Tapes

2003-01-14 Thread Christoph Scheeder
Hi, first thing i would try is removing every comments from your new config files. Sometimes the amanda changer-scripts just don't like them. Christoph Aaron Smith schrieb: Ok. I think I have a simple configuration error here. I'm running amanda 2.4.2p2 on Redhat 7.2. I have a Sony TSL-11000

Re: swap out a tape within the rotation

2003-01-14 Thread Paul Bijnens
wab wrote: That's a REALLY good point. the idea is to keep the data on this tape forever... or at least until we're sure we will never need the data again. Would amrestore still work, though? If that is true, then I'm less worried about losing the index. I take some tapes out of my 'archive'

Re: Bad file descriptor ??

2003-01-14 Thread Joshua Baker-LePain
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 at 12:22pm, Marcel Welschbillig wrote Hi all, Hi. Please don't send HTML as well as plain text -- there's really no point to it. Just use plain text. I've been using Amanda to backup some Linux systems for quite some time. Recently I am getting the following errors.

unsubscribe

2003-01-14 Thread Novocon Technical Support
- Unlimited Internet Access for $9.95/mo Get more for less - Sign up Now! www.novocon.net = Outgoing mail is scanned for viruses =

Re: amanda 2.4.3 RESULTS MISSING

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
This should have gone to amanda-users. I've redirected it there. On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:57:40PM +0100, Sergio G. Reus wrote: Hi, I've installed amanda 2.4.3 on an AIX server. After following every installation step, and creating a simple configuration, I have run amdump. It runs

Fwd: Re: Dump aborted

2003-01-14 Thread Kablan BOGNINI
Remarque : message transféré en pièce jointe. ___ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ---BeginMessage--- --- Jon LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : On Mon, Jan 13,

Re: amanda 2.4.3 RESULTS MISSING

2003-01-14 Thread Sergio G. Reus
/rep.txt I get the same report than in the mail, and the following errors in the standard output: line 8 of log is bogus line 9 of log is bogus line 10 of log is bogus line 11 of log is bogus Just the SUCCESS lines. But the log file is correct. Judge yourself: START driver date 20030114 START

Re: amanda 2.4.3 RESULTS MISSING

2003-01-14 Thread Gene Heskett
. Judge yourself: START driver date 20030114 START planner date 20030114 INFO planner Adding new disk prmb:/etc. INFO planner Adding new disk prmb:/u04/copias/enfrio. FINISH planner date 20030114 STATS driver startup time 0.557 START taper datestamp 20030114 label PRMD-000 tape 0 SUCCESS dumper prmb

why is tapetype so slow?

2003-01-14 Thread Eric Sproul
Hi, I've been trying to run tapetype to get a reading on a new Compaq SDLT320 drive with 110/220 tapes. There are no tapetype definitions that I could find for this combination. I knew it would take a while (the last person to post an SDLT tapetype said it took him 2.5 days), but it took

Re: amanda 2.4.3 RESULTS MISSING

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 05:10:35PM +0100, Sergio G. Reus wrote: If the log file looks ok, does amreport config -l logfile -f outputfile generate a more reasonable report in outputfile, or is it the same report that was mailed to you after the amdump. If the You are right,

amreport - difference in 2.4.2 and 2.4.3

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
While investigating other things, I noticed a tiny difference in the reports from 2.4.2 and 2.4.3. Using the same input data, the column OUT-KB is 32Kb higher (one tape block?) for each DLE. It is particularly noticable for some of my empty disklist entries. Normally they report like this:

Re: why is tapetype so slow?

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 01:33:03PM -0500, Eric Sproul wrote: Hi, I've been trying to run tapetype to get a reading on a new Compaq SDLT320 drive with 110/220 tapes. There are no tapetype definitions that I could find for this combination. I knew it would take a while (the last person to

Re: Abandoning restore

2003-01-14 Thread Adnan Olia
Ok guys, I did some more research on this issue and found out the following information. I tailed the amidxtaped.2003022517*.debug file in my /tmp/amanda directory and found the follwing message when the restore is being abandoned. amrestore: write error: Connection reset by peer amidxtaped:

Re: why is tapetype so slow?

2003-01-14 Thread Eric Sproul
On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 13:56, Jon LaBadie wrote: Because something is wrong or you have a very old version of tapetype. Your drive specs will include a speed rating, in MB/sec probably. Divide that into your tape's rated capacity to get an approximation of how long it will take to write a

Re: why is tapetype so slow?

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 03:48:30PM -0500, Eric Sproul wrote: On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 13:56, Jon LaBadie wrote: Because something is wrong or you have a very old version of tapetype. Your drive specs will include a speed rating, in MB/sec probably. Divide that into your tape's rated

Re: why is tapetype so slow?

2003-01-14 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 03:48:30PM -0500, Eric Sproul wrote: Jon, I am using GNU mt 2.5, which does not have a comp command like the BSD version. The closest I can see is datcompression, but this is not a DAT drive. Nevertheless, querying my drive with: # mt -f /dev/nst0

Re: Multiple Tapes

2003-01-14 Thread Aaron Smith
The only problem with that is that the same changer-script uses BOTH config files. Therefore, it stands to reason that if a comment in one config file caused the changer-script to bomb, then the same comment in the other file would cause the changer-script to bomb. All I'm looking to do

chg-zd-mtx doesn't work

2003-01-14 Thread Axel Haenssen
if I run ../chg-zd-mtx info it reports: none no slots available but mtx status finds: Storage Changer /dev/changer:1 Drives, 7 Slots ( 0 Import/Export ) Data Transfer Element 0:Full (Storage Elememt 1 Loaded) Storage Element 1:Empty Storage Element 2:Full

GNU tar estimates for vfat filesystems (solved: Description of solution)

2003-01-14 Thread Chris Karakas
Dear AMANDA users, I am referring to the vfat estimates problem that I had almost two years ago. It has to do with getting the estimates right on a vfat filesystem. I had quite a few discussions on this at that time, see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amanda-users/message/26231

RE: Bad file descriptor ??

2003-01-14 Thread Marcel Welschbillig
Thnaks for the response. Sorry, will post in Plain text. This is the file /tmp/amanda/sendbackup.debug sendbackup: debug 1 pid 10346 ruid 530 euid 530 start time Tue Jan 14 11:28:54 2003 /usr/lib/amanda/sendbackup: got input request: DUMP sda5 0 1970:1:1:0:0:0 OPTIONS

Re: Time out

2003-01-14 Thread Olivier Nicole
'make install' is always the best way to make sure all the permissions are correct. OK, I was a good boy and installed amanda anew on the machine :) It seems that the problem is the same. So I join a complete /tmp/amanda/amanda.20030115.log, the problem seems to be a network problem. Amcheck