On Thursday, June 1, 2017 11:27:49 PM EDT Ivan Adzhubey wrote:
> [7:0:0:0]mediumx QUALSTAR TLS-8466 227d /dev/sch0 /dev/sg4
> [8:0:0:0]tapeIBM ULTRIUM-HH5 BBNF /dev/st0 /dev/sg2
> [8:0:1:0]tapeIBM ULTRIUM-HH5 BBNF /dev/st1 /dev/sg3
>
> But I
Thanks for all the input. I've made some changes and was able to get a
bit more throughput. I'll will continue to *tweak* the settings and
test. Thanks again Kern for a great product.
Steven Hammond
On 6/2/2017 8:28 AM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
See below ...
On 06/02/2017 01:44 PM,
Hi,
Can a tape written by Bacula with one MaximumBlockSize value be reused after
changing MaximumBlockSize to a different value? I mean, not the data on the
tape, I understand all data will be lost, but can the tape itself be relabeled
and then used with a different block size configured?
The
On 05/26/17 21:33, Dan Langille wrote:
On May 22, 2017, at 3:19 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
On 05/20/17 21:40, Dan Langille wrote:
I see it here:
http://regress.bacula.org/index.php?project=Bacula-7.4&date=2017-05-19
Now it says 0 errors, but I have "three-pool-disk" test intermittently
fai
Hi Rudolf,
Thanks for the prompt reply. Please scroll down for inline comments.
On Friday, June 02, 2017 09:52:58 AM Cejka Rudolf wrote:
> Ivan Adzhubey wrote (2017/06/01):
> > b) What is the effect of MaximumFileSize option and what would be its
> > optimal value for my IBM LTO-5 SAS drives? I h
Hello,
See below ...
On 06/02/2017 01:44 PM, Richard Fox wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 01:24:46PM +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
I don't seem to have the original post of Richard Fox, so could you please
specify what "this directive" is in the sentence:
Otherwise, this advice is a little
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 01:24:46PM +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> I don't seem to have the original post of Richard Fox, so could you please
> specify what "this directive" is in the sentence:
>
> Otherwise, this advice is a little contradictory to the documentation which
> states "On most mod
For most people tape compression is the way to go. In your particular
case you might want to use Client compression, but if you do, it would
be better to disable compression on the tape drive. Doing so will
probably improve your throughput.
Best regards,
Kern
On 06/01/2017 04:02 PM, Stev
Hello Steven,
I recommend setting the Minimum Block Size to 0 (the default).
For LTO-5 I recommend using Maximum File Size = 5 GB
Best regards,
Kern
On 06/01/2017 03:58 PM, Steven Hammond wrote:
Kern,
Ok, thanks. I am running concurrent jobs (10) and spooling the
data/attributes. I wi
I don't seem to have the original post of Richard Fox, so could you
please specify what "this directive" is in the sentence:
Otherwise, this advice is a little contradictory to the documentation which states
"On most modern tape drives, you will not need to specify this directive.
Best regards
Ivan Adzhubey wrote (2017/06/01):
> b) What is the effect of MaximumFileSize option and what would be its optimal
> value for my IBM LTO-5 SAS drives? I have used 8GB value found in one of the
> list posts, while the documentation suggests 2GB for LTO-4. But even set at
> 8GB this would create l
11 matches
Mail list logo
