Hi, Brian,
on Dienstag, 30. November 2004 at 19:24 you wrote to amanda-users:
>> It's Ok, no problem, I just wanted to be sure that we talk about the
>> same thing and not about any print-spooler or something. You know,
>> using the same terms helps ;-)
BC> Yes, common terminalogy help. There wa
Hi, Brian,
on Dienstag, 30. November 2004 at 20:01 you wrote to amanda-users:
BC> This was the output of the 3rd amanda run on Samar.
BC> Here we have the corrected tape capacity, corrected columnspec,
BC> the presence of a holding area.
BC> I was going to
[...]
BC> I'm not gonna though, I hav
On Tuesday 30 November 2004 11:55, Brian Cuttler wrote:
>Gene,
>Stefan,
>
>I should clarify further...
>
>Extracted from "disklist"
>samar / comp-root
>samar /usr1 comp-user
>samar /usr5/amanda {
>user-tar
>}
>
>Extracted from "amanda.conf"
>
>define dumptype comp-root {
Woops, a couple more things I'd meant to say...
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:24:49PM -0500, Brian Cuttler wrote:
> I really should have another spindle, ideally as large
> as the total usage of the top 2 users on /usr5 - however that is about
> 300 Gig.
If your Amanda server does (or can be made to
Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
--
More generally spoken:
I would really like to know how many requests on this list that at
first look very mysterious break down to FAQ-kind-of-things in the
end.
Ever noticed that?
Well, one of the best things about amanda is that amcheck almost always
tells you e
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:55:39AM -0500, Brian Cuttler wrote:
> I haven't followed the thread as closely as I could have. There is
> a patch for spaning DLE across output/tape volumes ? Would it be
> effecatious in a direct to tape senario like this one ? Is it ready
> for prime-time ?
Yes; I'm n
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:24:49PM -0500, Brian Cuttler wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06:10:22PM +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> > [suggests "taperalgo"]
>
> There is a dumporder parameter in amanda.conf [...]
>
> I do not know if dumporder is utilized when scheduling the clients or
> whe
Stefan,
Gene,
This was the output of the 3rd amanda run on Samar.
Here we have the corrected tape capacity, corrected columnspec,
the presence of a holding area.
I was going to say that amanda incorrectly marked previous level 0
successful when it shouldn't have...
I'm not gonna though, I have t
Stefan,
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06:10:22PM +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Hi, Brian,
>
> (let's keep this thread inside this list, pls, it's easier to follow
> things)
Of course, had intended to CC the list.
> on Dienstag, 30. November 2004 at 15:43 you wrote to amanda-users:
> >> you me
Hi, Brian,
(let's keep this thread inside this list, pls, it's easier to follow
things)
on Dienstag, 30. November 2004 at 15:43 you wrote to amanda-users:
>> you mean "holding disk" in AMANDA-terms?
BC> Yes, "holding disk". In more generic terms a "spooling" area for the
dump/tar'd,
BC> possib
Gene,
Stefan,
I should clarify further...
Extracted from "disklist"
samar / comp-root
samar /usr1 comp-user
samar /usr5/amanda {
user-tar
}
Extracted from "amanda.conf"
define dumptype comp-root {
global
comment "Root partitions with compression"
compres
Stefan,
On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 12:46:17AM +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Hi, Brian,
>
> on Montag, 29. November 2004 at 17:51 you wrote to amanda-users:
>
> BC> I've broken the raid into DLEs based on the top level directory
> BC> structure of the (single large) partition. The raid is .88
hi,
I just reported this to a gentoo-linux bugtracker and think you might also be
interested ;)
Thanks in advance for having a look.
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72919
Summary: amandad segfaults (via inetd) while running amcheck
Product: Gentoo Linux
Version: unspecif
13 matches
Mail list logo
