On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
> Oops, yes, I did an amrmtape in an effort to force amdump to use the virtual
> tape that was in the incomplete dump, rather than overwrite the next one in
> the rotation. I used to do that with physical tapes, but perhaps I forgot
> that
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:26 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
I waited until the network issues cleared up and started a new dump on a new
virtual tape. It appears the amcleanup had deleted it from the tapelist, so
I manually re-entered it with the p
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:26 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
> I waited until the network issues cleared up and started a new dump on a new
> virtual tape. It appears the amcleanup had deleted it from the tapelist, so
> I manually re-entered it with the presumed date that it was last used.
I'm not
A stange thing happened to me over the past few days. I started a remote
dump of about 66GB, which normally takes about 30-35 hours. However, I
noticed on Sunday that it was crawling at less than 200kbps, apparently
due to some temporary network issues. I killed the amdump process and did
