Paul & Jon - thanks for the tip about using taperalgo. I wasn't aware of
this parameter. Will try it out but I'm not sure how well it will work
for me - I'm only dumping from one client, there are a lot of
filesystems that are large compared to the tape size and there isn't
enough space to keep
Frank Smith wrote:
How difficult would it be to implement a 'best fit' strategy?
The number of possibilities is extremely large, and
because the tapecapacity is only an approximation, not worth
the cost. My AIT-1 tapes hit end of tape between 33 and 34 Gbyte.
And rarely there is one which suddenly
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:36:56PM -0600, Frank Smith wrote:
> --On Tuesday, December 07, 2004 14:13:43 -0500 Jon LaBadie <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Note, this does not affect the order of dumping. Other parameters
> > do that. It only affects which, of the already completed dumps,
>
--On Tuesday, December 07, 2004 14:13:43 -0500 Jon LaBadie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Note, this does not affect the order of dumping. Other parameters
> do that. It only affects which, of the already completed dumps,
> amanda will choose to tape next. It will not wait around for
> one tha
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 12:35:29PM -0500, Chris Loken wrote:
>
> Apologies if this has come up before. Couldn't find anything relevant.
> I'm talking about level 0 dumps (not incrementals). Using ait-3 tapes,
> GNUTAR (not linux "dump"), a tape library, 104GB holding disk and
> setting runtape
Chris Loken wrote:
Apologies if this has come up before. Couldn't find anything relevant.
I'm talking about level 0 dumps (not incrementals). Using ait-3 tapes,
GNUTAR (not linux "dump"), a tape library, 104GB holding disk and
setting runtapes greater than 1 (I need to dump several tapes-worth
