Is it possible to have the email reports list the file systems in the order
they were written to tape?
this would make it much easier to locate a file on the tape, especially if
you have a lot of file systems.
g.
ECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John R. Jackson
> Sent: Monday, 29 January 2001 11:56 AM
> To: Grant Beattie
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: amreport broken between 2.4.1p1 and 2.4.2
>
>
> >The email output of amreport seems to have b
How does one configure the blocksize?
What about the blocksize used on the tape? perhaps that can be tuned, too...
g.
> -Original Message-
> From: Marc W. Mengel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 30 January 2001 3:12 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Grant
> >I have always wondered .. why does amanda pipe ufsdump output to
> ufsrestore
> >before sending it to the tape device?
>
> It's collecting the index data.
John, thanks for clarifying...
> >If amanda is dumping direct to tape (file systems that are
> bigger than the
> >holding disk), I'm lucky
I have always wondered .. why does amanda pipe ufsdump output to ufsrestore
before sending it to the tape device?
If I ufsdump direct to tape, eg.
ufsdump 0f /dev/rmt/0n /
I consistently achieve 3mb/second (Exabyte mammoth).
If amanda is dumping direct to tape (file systems that are bigger tha
The email output of amreport seems to have been broken somewhere between
2.4.1p1 and 2.4.2.
The column widths are incorrectly determined and the output is particularly
messy with large file systems (and/or large lengths of time, etc).
It would also make more sense (to me, at least) for the outpu
Is this known to work with the Exabyte EXB-210/220?
g.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Thomas Hepper
Sent: Sunday, 28 May 2000 5:10 PM
To: Yura Pismerov
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: barcodes
Hi,
On Wed, May 10, 2000 at 12:30:01PM
