Jon LaBadie wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:39:36AM -0500, rory_f wrote: > > > > > the question again then i guess? > > > > hi guys. > > > > we're run amcheckdump on a backup we just did and it has given us a few > > outputs we're not sure about -whether it is tar being non-understanding of > > a backup using spanned tapes, or something else? we're a bit lost so > > hopefully someone can help > > > > ps. ignore the file paths below, i just changed them to cover our > > hostname/directories. > > > > > > ..20081029235711 level 0 part 4 on tape AmaTor-007 file #1 > > "/dev/nst0" uses deprecated device naming convention; > > using "tape:/dev/nst0" instead. > > /bin/gtar: Read 2048 bytes from - > > /bin/gtar: Unexpected EOF in archive > > /bin/gtar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now > > Validation process returned 2 (full status 512) > > > > As above, a good number of the error messages were generated > by /bin/gtar itself. Is it possible that the backups were > made with one version of gnutar and amcheckdump is calling > a different one with some incompatibilities? > > Nah, that never happens ;) > > jl > > > > > using '/bin/gtar tf - > /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump && cat > > > /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump'. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 5 on tape AmaTor-007 file #2 > > Continuing with previously started validation process. > > Error reading 32768 bytes from /dev/nst0: Input/output error > > Error reading device or writing data to validation command. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 1 on tape AmaTor-007 file #3 > > Could not seek to file 3 of volume AmaTor-007. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 2 on tape AmaTor-007 file #4 > > Details of dump at file 4 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 3 on tape AmaTor-007 file #5 > > Details of dump at file 5 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 4 on tape AmaTor-007 file #6 > > Details of dump at file 6 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 5 on tape AmaTor-007 file #7 > > Details of dump at file 7 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 6 on tape AmaTor-007 file #8 > > Details of dump at file 8 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 7 on tape AmaTor-007 file #9 > > Details of dump at file 9 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 8 on tape AmaTor-007 file #10 > > Details of dump at file 10 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 9 on tape AmaTor-007 file #11 > > Details of dump at file 11 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 10 on tape AmaTor-007 file #12 > > Details of dump at file 12 of volume AmaTor-007 do not match logfile. > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 11 on tape AmaTor-008 file #1 > > "/dev/nst0" uses deprecated device naming convention; > > using "tape:/dev/nst0" instead. > > using '/bin/gtar tf - > /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump && cat > > > /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump'. > > /bin/gtar: This does not look like a tar archive > > /bin/gtar: Skipping to next header > > /bin/gtar: Archive contains obsolescent base-64 headers > > Validating image xxxx.com:/array/sata-1/.../SHOTS/something/ datestamp > > 20081029235711 level 0 part 12 on tape AmaTor-008 file #2 > > Continuing with previously started validation process. > > /bin/gtar: Error exit delayed from previous errors > > Validation process returned 2 (full status 512) > > > > > > Whats the easiest way to figure out what file(s) the error is refering to? > > And/Or is it really something to worry about. > > > > What about the last error, validation process returned 2? What does this > > mean? is there any way to run a check on the tape itself, and not the whole > > backup again, to save time? > > > > Thanks. > > > > +---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > |This was sent by rory < at > mrxfx.com via Backup Central. > > |Forward SPAM to abuse < at > backupcentral.com. > > +---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End of included message <<< > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Jon H. LaBadie jon < at > jgcomp.com > JG Computing > 12027 Creekbend Drive (703) 787-0884 > Reston, VA 20194 (703) 787-0922 (fax)
Um, haha. its all on the same machine. i dont think thats the case. Im actually finishing up a backing up a 6tb project right now using tape_splitsize, and perhaps from now on i wont use it. we have a system in place to breakdown folder sizes for our whole file system here, so using just single tapes and doing root-tar whilst figuring out tape capacities ourself isnt actually out of the question. Thanks for all the input. +---------------------------------------------------------------------- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +----------------------------------------------------------------------