Am 2016-11-13 um 06:44 schrieb Jon LaBadie:
I'm going to be setting up an amanda server with vtapes spread over > 4-6 disk drives. I expect several of the drives will be able to >
hold two or more dumpcycles worth of vtapes. What would you > recommend
for the distribution of the vtapes, each disk hold a single > sequential
group of tapes or stripe them in some way across the > disks. > > A
simple for instance, 3 disks each holding 30 vtapes. > > Sequential:
disk 1 tapes 1-30 disk 2 tapes 31-60 disk 3 tapes > 61-90 > >
Striped: disk 1 tapes 1-15 + 46-60 disk 2 tapes 16-30 + > 61-75
disk 3 tapes 31-45 + 76-90 > > Any pros or cons about either
approach with regard to data loss on a > disk failure? Or other things
too. > > Jon
I use a setup where I let that to amanda:
if I don't change the external disk, amanda rotates over the vtapes on
that one disk (=one tpchanger using chg-disk) happily.
That changer has more vtapes than $dumpcycle, so that works.
If I change to the next external disk (=2nd chg-disk-changer, both
aggregated via chg-aggregate), it rotates there.
The goal is that even if the responsible people forget to swap disks,
the backups should keep on going.
As the vtapes are labelled automatically on the way (it's a choice, not
a must), I decided to not care too much about the distribution as you
suggest above. For sure you *can* do that by labelling vtapes by
yourself etc.
What might come into the picture as well with new amanda-3.4: look for
the parameters "retention_*" etc, those give even more ways to screw
things up ;-)
(although I think 3.4 is not yet in the distros out there)
