Gene Heskett wrote:
On Friday 21 July 2006 11:29, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
On Friday 21 July 2006 15:58, Gene Heskett wrote:
I'm just as puzzled, I now have the latest 2.5.1p1-20060719
installed and I have no such file either.
Woul
On Friday 21 July 2006 11:29, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
>> On Friday 21 July 2006 15:58, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > I'm just as puzzled, I now have the latest 2.5.1p1-20060719
>> > installed and I have no such file either.
>> >
>> > Would the
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:21:34PM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
> On Friday 21 July 2006 17:18, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > I hesitate to say they are better. But perhaps more popular
> > are the scripts based on using the mtx command, either chg-mtx
> > or more commonly the newer chg-zd-mtx.
>
> Tha
On Friday 21 July 2006 17:18, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> I hesitate to say they are better. But perhaps more popular
> are the scripts based on using the mtx command, either chg-mtx
> or more commonly the newer chg-zd-mtx.
Thanks. I switched to chg-zd-mtx. Doing a couple of amtape tests, however the
o
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Gene Heskett
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 10:58 AM
To: amanda-users@amanda.org
Subject: Re: tapestatus file growing huge
On Friday 21 July 2006 10:34, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 10:46:51AM +0100, Rodrigo
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 04:42:08PM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
> On Friday 21 July 2006 16:29, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > From the low volume of comments about chg-scsi on this list
> > it seems few sites are using that changer. Thus our unfamiliarity
> > with its config and log files. Sorry.
> >
>
On Friday 21 July 2006 16:29, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> From the low volume of comments about chg-scsi on this list
> it seems few sites are using that changer. Thus our unfamiliarity
> with its config and log files. Sorry.
>
> Of course, as few people post to the list except with problems,
> maybe th
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
> On Friday 21 July 2006 15:58, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I'm just as puzzled, I now have the latest 2.5.1p1-20060719 installed
> > and I have no such file either.
> >
> > Would the OP please supply the full path to this file?
>
> The
On Friday 21 July 2006 15:58, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I'm just as puzzled, I now have the latest 2.5.1p1-20060719 installed
> and I have no such file either.
>
> Would the OP please supply the full path to this file?
The filename is tapestatus and is created in the config directory (e.g., where
ama
On Friday 21 July 2006 10:34, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 10:46:51AM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
>> Today the server disk went out of space because the tapestatus file
>> grew over several GiGs. It seems to be related with upgrading amanda
>> to 2.5.0p2. The contents are lines lik
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 10:46:51AM +0100, Rodrigo Ventura wrote:
>
> Today the server disk went out of space because the tapestatus file grew over
> several GiGs. It seems to be related with upgrading amanda to 2.5.0p2. The
> contents are lines like "tape status = ...". Any clues?
>
I'm unfami
More details; the head of the tapestatus:
$ head -n 30 tapestatus
20060720 ISR003
Write Error Counters Page
Total Errors Corrected = 0
Total Times E. Processed = 0
Total Bytes Processed = 0
Total Unrecoverable Errors = 0
Read Error Counter
Today the server disk went out of space because the tapestatus file grew over
several GiGs. It seems to be related with upgrading amanda to 2.5.0p2. The
contents are lines like "tape status = ...". Any clues?
Cheers,
Rodrigo
--
*** Rodrigo Martins de Matos Ventura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*** W
13 matches
Mail list logo
