[Amanda-users] Making sure AMANDA does not run over tapesize

2011-01-05 Thread rory_f
Hey,

So I've noticed that sometimes Amanda will fill up a tape with more than 400gb 
(LTO3) - I'm assuming this is down to compression? Is there another way to 
limit this from happening apart from turning hardware and software compression 
off?

Thanks,

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Making sure AMANDA does not run over tapesize

2011-01-05 Thread rory_f
I want to ensure tapes are filled 100% each time where possible. I've written a 
script in python to look at directory, figure out size, and create a disklist 
which will ensure a round about size for each disklist file - so for instance 
it will try to create a disklist file that contains entries in groups of 
400gb's - the size of a tape. I know amanda will fill a tape to 100% where 
possible but sometimes, if it is using compression, this doesn't work, and the 
first two tapes will fill 500gb+ and then the last tape will be left with 
200gb. This is a waste of 200gb - I'm trying to make sure all tapes are full 
where possible and not waste any space.

I know I could take the tape that is half full and archive the contents again 
with added content but this is time consuming.

I just want to make sure amanda is working with my script to make sure all 
tapes are being filled. 

Do you see what i'm getting at?

Thanks,




Brian Cuttler wrote:
 Rory,
 
 When I am using tape compression I often...sorry.
 
 When using SW tape compression amanda will know what the
 typical compression is for any given DLE and will (I believe)
 use the expected compressed size of the data when estimating
 overall tape usage.
 
 When I use HW compression I often lie about the tape length,
 extending the actually physical size by the expected compression
 amount so that I am able to utilize the full physical tape.
 This is very valuable for me in the couple of cases where I
 have a non-spanning DLE that is larger than the physical tape
 would be without compression, else amanda would report that the
 DLE was larger than the tape...
 
 What goal/outcome are you seeking ?
 
   Brian
 
 On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:34:47AM -0500, rory_f wrote:
 
  Hey,
  
  So I've noticed that sometimes Amanda will fill up a tape with more than 
  400gb (LTO3) - I'm assuming this is down to compression? Is there another 
  way to limit this from happening apart from turning hardware and software 
  compression off?
  
  Thanks,
  
  +--
  |This was sent by rory  at  mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
  |Forward SPAM to abuse  at  backupcentral.com.
  +--
  
  
  
 ---
 


+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Making sure AMANDA does not run over tapesize

2011-01-05 Thread rory_f

choogendyk wrote:
 On 1/5/11 12:00 PM, rory_f wrote:
 
  I want to ensure tapes are filled 100% each time where possible. I've 
  written a script in python to look at directory, figure out size, and 
  create a disklist which will ensure a round about size for each disklist 
  file - so for instance it will try to create a disklist file that contains 
  entries in groups of 400gb's - the size of a tape. I know amanda will fill 
  a tape to 100% where possible but sometimes, if it is using compression, 
  this doesn't work, and the first two tapes will fill 500gb+ and then the 
  last tape will be left with 200gb. This is a waste of 200gb - I'm trying to 
  make sure all tapes are full where possible and not waste any space.
  
 
 Not to be rude, but that's a false economy.
 
 It could just as easily be said that you would be wasting tape capacity by 
 not using compression.
 
 You are asking to not allow more than 400GB per tape, and thus no more than 
 1200GB on the set of 3. 
 Then you are complaining that the 1200GB is unevenly distributed across the 3 
 tapes, because 
 compression allowed more than 400GB on each of the first 2 tapes. So, stated 
 another way, you are 
 asking that the wasted (or unused) 300GB (or so) of space be distributed 
 across all 3 tapes, 
 rather than just being on the last tape, and/or to just not use compression 
 so that you can imagine 
 that you are not wasting tape.
 
 500GB per tape means that you are getting about 20% compression. If that is 
 consistent, have your 
 python script set to queue up somewhere between 1400GB to 1500GB for backup, 
 the choice depending on 
 how close you want to shave it (with a higher risk of over running the last 
 tape). Then you are 
 being economical with your tape usage, getting a couple hundred more GB on 
 the set of tapes than you 
 were originally thinking.
 
 Of course, compressibility varies widely. Huge directories of TIFF and JPEG 
 files can be essentially 
 uncompressible. Typical unix directories of predominantly text based stuff, 
 like log files or 
 configuration files, are highly compressible, and repetitive things like 
 Apache access logs can 
 compress as much as 10:1. So, you have to know your data to efficiently plan 
 what you are trying to do.
 
 


Ok. I totally see your point - you are very correct.The majority of the files 
being backed up are images - dpx, exr, cin, etc - we are a VFX house.

I guess with a wide range of varying file types theres no real way to 'predict' 
the type of compression, is there?

Perhaps what i'm looking to do is guarantee the most economical way of filling 
the tapes.. It would be great to count on compression of 20% every time but it 
seems to vary too much to rely on AMANDA to work this way.

Thanks for your view though - initially I didnt look at it that way.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Making sure AMANDA does not run over tapesize

2011-01-05 Thread rory_f

Charles Curley wrote:
 On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:19:42 -0500
 rory_f amanda-forum  at  backupcentral.com wrote:
 
 
  Perhaps what i'm looking to do is guarantee the most economical way
  of filling the tapes.
  
 
 Which is more valuable, a few terabytes of tape space, or your time?
 
 -- 
 
 Charles Curley  /\ASCII Ribbon Campaign
 Looking for fine software   \ /Respect for open standards
 and/or writing?  X No HTML/RTF in email
 http://www.charlescurley.com/ \No M$ Word docs in email
 
 Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0  809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB


I guess that depends if you ask me (as it is my time) or the boss (who pays for 
the tapes ;-])

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-10 Thread rory_f


Gene Heskett wrote:
 On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
 
 Absolutely no, amanda ignores that.  It is for your edification only.
 
 One other question:  Did you take note of whether or not the drive was 
 streaming steadily, or was it 'shoe shining' occasionally?  One can normally 
 hear such goings on by the squawk of the steppers as they wind up and slow 
 down.
 
 


Hey,
I couldn't tell you . I don't recall anything like that though.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-09 Thread rory_f


Gene Heskett wrote:
 On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
 
 If the card is wide scsi, perhaps a cabling issue or termination issue has 
 caused it to fall back to scsi-II width and speeds?  I have read that some 
 cards do this, and a reboot once the problem is solved, might bring back the 
 full speed.  Might be worth a try just to satisfy the curious cat in all of 
 us.
 
 
  Theoretically, this new drive should be as fast if not faster.. but it
  isn't.
  
 
 Do you recall the block size used with the previous drive?  If it was also 
 32k which is the default, some speed improvements can be had with larger 
 block sizes, but I doubt that could make a 2/1 ratio change in the drives 
 speed.
 
 
  At least it seems to *work* now.
  
 
 Which is nice, but I believe I would take up the speed problem with the 
 vendor after I had rebooted and checked to see if it persists.  Perhaps there 
 is a spindle speed jumper that is miss-placed on this one?  Possibly 
 automatically interlocked with the write clock speed since you did get the 
 exact same size, so the drive maintains the same bits per inch.
 
 But I'm making SWAG's here, my knowledge of drives isn't nearly as deeply 
 ingrained as the scsi experience is.
 
 Perhaps someone else here can help?
 
 


I've rebooted the machine a few times. I'll try again, after i set the cables 
again.

One question; i don't have to run amtapetype every time i do this do i? For 
instance, say the speed problems are resolved, will amdump pick up on this 
automatically or does it stick to the tape speed given in amtapetype absolutely?

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-09 Thread rory_f


Gene Heskett wrote:
 On Monday 08 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
 
 Please do.  It could be something I missed, or it could be a brand new 
 phenomenon to file away in my trivia file.
 
 


gene,

ama...@backup tor]$ amtapetype -o -f /dev/nst0 -e 400G
Writing 1024 Mbyte   compresseable data:  31 sec
Writing 1024 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 31 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 24800 sec = 6 h 53 min
wrote 12845056 32 Kb blocks in 98 files in 11738 seconds (No space left on 
device)
wrote 12910592 32 Kb blocks in 197 files in 11840 seconds (No space left on 
device)
define tapetype NEW_IBM_DRIVE {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 402432 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 34955 kps
}

comparing this tapetype to the last ibm drive (that broke and was replaced by 
this) the speed is nearly half. 

define tapetype BROKE_IBM_DRIVE {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 402432 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 71201 kps
}

This brings me to another question - what could be causing this ?

The system itself has not changed, nor has the cabling, really. unless the 
cables have become damaged (or the scsi card inside the machine is now having 
problems), what else is to check?

Theoretically, this new drive should be as fast if not faster.. but it isn't.

At least it seems to *work* now.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-09 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:55 AM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  One question; i don't have to run amtapetype every time i do this do i? For 
  instance, say the speed problems are resolved, will amdump pick up on this 
  automatically or does it stick to the tape speed given in amtapetype 
  absolutely?
  
 
 Amdump just runs the tape as fast as it goes.  The speed estimate is not used.
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Open Source Storage Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


Thanks Dustin, good to know.

Thanks to everyone else for the help. Time to return this HP drive ;-]

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-08 Thread rory_f


Gene Heskett wrote:
 On Saturday 06 March 2010, Jon LaBadie wrote:
 
 
 Because the scsi buss is a transmission line, and demands a decent VSWR, 
 there are 2 things to remember when dealing with scsi.
 
 1.A list of pre-requisites that must be met if it is to work:
 
 1.a: termination power, it has to come from someplace, preferably the host 
 controller.
 
 1.b: terminations can only be at the ends of the cable, one and exactly one 
 on each end.  Leaving a 6 pigtail hanging out because you removed the drive 
 on the end of the cable, and which co-incidentally also was the terminating 
 device is a more common mistake than one would think.
 
 1.c: when supplying scsi term power, there needs to be an isolation diode 
 between the supply and the term power line in the cable, pointed so that the 
 voltage can get to the cable ok, but cannot be fed back into an accessory 
 device after it has powered the terminators on that device.
 
 1.d: Because this diode has a voltage drop, and the original idiots (yes, 
 that _is_ the right terminology) chose the resistor values based on std 
 values AND a 5 volt supply, so a common silicon diode virtually cannot be 
 used if the scsi bus is to be error free.  The .65 to .7 volts of drop in an 
 Si diode reduces the logic one voltages noise margin by about 2/3rds. from 
 the target of 3.0 volts, but usually about 2.85 due to the resistors chosen, 
 throw in the .7 loss of the diode divided by the resistor ratio's (330 to 
 ground, 220 to the 5 volt line, and your logic 1 noise margin is whats left 
 after you subtract the 2.4 volts of a guaranteed logic 1.  At 2.7 volts it 
 might work if  the resistor tolerance are spot on.  At 2.55 volts, you have 
 only a 150 millivolt noise margin and you may as well hold a seance, its 
 dead, Jim. Therefore this diode must be either a power germanium or a 
 schotkey rated for the current in order to get a decently low forward voltage 
 drop.  Otherwise find a 6 volt supply for termination power.  TBT, when the 
 psu voltage in the host machine is starting to sag in its old age, and is 
 already 200 millivolts low, I've been known to go get a 6 volt dc wall wart 
 from the shack and use that.  It Just Works(TM).  FWIW, I have yet to see a 
 Ge or Schotkey diode used on any of the major scsi vendors cards, so don't 
 assume that just because it says Adaptec on it, it can't be wrong.  And it is 
 precisely those cards I've had to wall wart power several times.
 
 If you've done all that  it still doesn't work, have a tech with a 100+ mhz 
 scope look at it to see why the signal echos (aka VSWR) are so bad.  Maybe 
 you've got one bad resistor in the termination packs, so check all active 
 lines, 21 of them in a 50 wire scsi-II cable IIRC. Make sure he understands 
 exactly what the term 'VSWR' means, a great many don't, somehow thinking it 
 only applies to continuous wave radio/tv transmitters.  VSWR is VSWR whether 
 its digital, or CW, its still VSWR.
 
 2:  Alternatively, you can advertise for a virgin to be sacrificed.  It won't 
 help of course.  And its a terrible waste considering how hard it is to find 
 one these days.
 
 -- 
 Cheers, Gene
 There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
 -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
 
 Reality is bad enough, why should I tell the truth?
   -- Patrick Sky


Well, thanks for the long explanation. I doubt i will be able to test the setup 
as much as you have described but it's useful information. I've tried  a couple 
of different cables, unplugged and plugged back in, all that jazz. These are 
the cables i've used previously without any trouble. 

I'm more inclined then to think it is the drive. but who knows..

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-08 Thread rory_f

[quote=Gene Heskett]On Monday 08 March 2010, rory_f wrote:

 Gene Heskett wrote:
 
 In your case, two things.  Is it the last drive on the cable?, and is it 
 terminated properly?  And I would certainly check the 5 volt line of the host 
 computer to see if its sagging in its old age. 4.85 volts won't cause the 
 host to reset itself, but it does put the noise margin of a scsi buss in 
 danger.  You need every millivolt you can get there.
 
 


It is setup as such:

Overland tape library, drive inside it. Drive connects to library via one 
cable, then another cable connects to scsi card in linux machine - It has been 
setup like this for a couple of years now. 

It could  very well be the cable degrading, or the card in the linux machine. 
That is something I am yet to check. Our other drive is being replaced today 
(For a NEW ibm lto 3 drive) so hopefully i can test that one - if i get th same 
issues ,we can say it is something else other than the drives.

I'll let you all know what i find.

Thanks.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-08 Thread rory_f


Gene Heskett wrote:
 On Monday 08 March 2010, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 
  On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Gene Heskett gene.heskett  at  
  verizon.net 
  
 wrote:
 
  
   Be my guest if you have write privileges.
   
  
  It's a wiki - everyone has write privileges (including, to my dismay,
  spammers .. but I try to keep up with them).
  
  Please do add this to the wiki!
  
  Dustin
  
  
 I would Dustin, but 2 questions:  Where do I put in, or can I make a new 
 category?
 
 And 2, I don't see any edit buttons anyplace, security by obscurity I believe 
 they call that.  So that seems to be a show stopper. :(
 
 -- 
 Cheers, Gene
 There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
 -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
 
 netgod Feanor: u have no idea of the depth of the stupidty of american law


I started an amtapetype earlier on the new drive, and it's still running now.

Writing 1024 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 31 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 24800 sec = 6 h 53 min
wrote 12845056 32 Kb blocks in 98 files in 11738 seconds (No space left on 
device)
wrote 3473408 32 Kb blocks in 53 files

that estimated time write is still high (i think) but the 'no space left on 
device' is roughly about double the amount of seconds as it was when the tape 
was only being filled 50%. So i think this is going to produce a proper 
tapetype, if not a slow one.

So it could be a combination of things.. i'll know more tomorrow.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-05 Thread rory_f

anyone?

i'm doing a tape run now, using the original tapetype definition, and it has 
filled a tape to around 238gb and moved onto the next one (well it has changed 
tapes,it's still waiting to write to tape)

is this normal?

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-05 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:17 AM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  i'm doing a tape run now, using the original tapetype definition, and it 
  has filled a tape to around 238gb and moved onto the next one (well it has 
  changed tapes,it's still waiting to write to tape)
  
  is this normal?
  
 
 Amanda treats any error from the tape drive as EOT.  It's the nature
 of UNIX kernel drivers that they don't give much more information than
 that.  So it's quite possible that your tape drive is failing, or the
 tapes are failing, and intermittent errors are causing the early EOT
 indication.
 
 Alternately, maybe the earlier amtapetype run was made with hardware
 compression on?  The size is about double..
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Open Source Storage Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


I made sure to turn compression off and also the output of the tapetype didn't 
mention compression was on - it normally does if it detects compression, right?

Perhaps compression is turned on elsewhere - im not sure where though. So you 
think what is happening is the kernel thinks these tapes are only 200~gb and 
giving an EOT to amanda - when infact they are 400gb LTO3 tapes.

I doubt the tapes are failing - but i mean it is possible, i've used the same 
type of tapes for over 400 tapes with amanda and never seen this issue.

I'm guessing then it's the drive itself.. there's no real way to tell. This is 
our second tape drive, the one we have used more consistantly with Amanda is 
out being replaced as it died, too :/

I'll run a amtapetype again to make sure, i guess.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-05 Thread rory_f


Brian Cuttler wrote:
 Gene,
 
 I had no idea it was that difficult to reset.
 
 I apologize if I left the impression that I thought it
 was an amanda issue, I was sure it was in the HW and
 the driver, but I didn't express.
 
 In truth I seldom touch a drive for other amanda amanda
 related work, only when assisting an end-user backing up
 their own data or installing a new drive for an end-user use.
 
 On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 01:30:43PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
 
  On Friday 05 March 2010, Brian Cuttler wrote:
  
   Rory,
   
   I may be wrong, nor my information obsolete for your tapedevice
   but I seem to recall that if you want to actually turn off compression
   you have to also relabel the tape. If it sees the amlabel was
   written in compessed mode...
   
   
  Yes, back when I was using tape, that was a major problem, so much so that 
  I 
  finally read the first block of a new, but labeled, uncompressed tape, then 
  used dd to write that first block to every tape on the premises, then 
  forcibly relabeled them for my system.  A certified PIMA...  Then I bought 
  another case of tape from ebay,  they looked new, cello wrap  the whole 
  maryann, but they weren't, and the whole scene had to be repeated, its a 
  darned virus I think.
  
  This BTW, is not an amanda problem, its 100% the drive, it reads its own 
  hidden header data while 'recognizing' or 'accepting' the tape, and sets 
  the 
  compression according to what it finds.  So that gets reset to match the 
  tape 
  any time you do a rewind, so you must do the rewind, and THEN issue the 
  compression off command, through mtx I think it was, and then, without 
  accessing the drive, write the uncompressed first block.  Never give it a 
  chance to re-read that block until its done writing the new one..
  
  
  
   On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:21:32PM -0500, rory_f wrote:
   
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:

 On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:17 AM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 

   
  backupcentral.com wrote:
  
   

 
  i'm doing a tape run now, using the original tapetype definition, 
  and
  it has filled a tape to around 238gb and moved onto the next one
  (well it has changed tapes,it's still waiting to write to tape)
  
  is this normal?
  
 
 Amanda treats any error from the tape drive as EOT.  It's the nature
 of UNIX kernel drivers that they don't give much more information than
 that.  So it's quite possible that your tape drive is failing, or the
 tapes are failing, and intermittent errors are causing the early EOT
 indication.
 
 Alternately, maybe the earlier amtapetype run was made with hardware
 compression on?  The size is about double..
 
 Dustin
 

I made sure to turn compression off and also the output of the tapetype
didn't mention compression was on - it normally does if it detects
compression, right?

Perhaps compression is turned on elsewhere - im not sure where though. 
So
you think what is happening is the kernel thinks these tapes are only
200~gb and giving an EOT to amanda - when infact they are 400gb LTO3
tapes.

I doubt the tapes are failing - but i mean it is possible, i've used the
same type of tapes for over 400 tapes with amanda and never seen this
issue.

I'm guessing then it's the drive itself.. there's no real way to tell.
This is our second tape drive, the one we have used more consistantly
with Amanda is out being replaced as it died, too :/

I'll run a amtapetype again to make sure, i guess.

+--

|This was sent by rory  at  mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse  at  backupcentral.com.

+--

   
   ---
   Brian R Cuttler brian.cuttler  at  wadsworth.org
   Computer Systems Support(v) 518 486-1697
   Wadsworth Center(f) 518 473-6384
   NYS Department of HealthHelp Desk 518 473-0773
   
   
   
   IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain
   confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally
   privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure.  It
   is intended only for the addressee.  If you received this in error or
   from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not
   distribute, copy or use it or any attachments.  Please notify the
   sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your
   system. Thank you for your cooperation.
   
   
  
  
  -- 
  Cheers, Gene
  There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
  -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
  
  You are as I am with You.
  
 ---
 Brian R Cuttler brian.cuttler  at  wadsworth.org
 Computer

[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-05 Thread rory_f


Jon LaBadie wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 02:57:01PM -0500, rory_f wrote:
 
  
  Hey guys. Thanks
  
  I checked my library GUI and for the tape run i was just talking about, 
  where it was stopping around 230gb, it seems compression WAS on. I turned 
  it off via mt and now the gui says off (after stopping the run obviously)
  
  I was *sure* i turned it off with mt before.  Im doing another amtapetype 
  now.
  
  And the comment regarding labeling: thanks. I'll most certainly relabel all 
  the tapes after this tapetype is done.
  
  Thanks again guys.
  
  
 
 Recalling your data in the original posting I think an amtapetype run was 
 estimated
 to take about 8 hours.  I think LTO drives are capable of writing a full tape 
 in
 about 1.5 hrs, amtapetype should do two full writes, thus about 3+ hours 
 total.
 
 As you system seems to be writing at less than 1/2 full speed, I wonder if it
 is failing to stream.  If an LTO drive is not streaming, is its capacity 
 affected
 by having large gaps caused by the start and stopping action?
 
 jl
 -- 
 Jon H. LaBadie  jon  at  jgcomp.com
 JG Computing
 12027 Creekbend Drive (703) 787-0884
 Reston, VA  20194 (703) 787-0922 (fax)


Hey

This is true - i believe on previous amtapetype runs it estimated 4hrs. I 
started again , compression off. still 7hrs.

So this drive seems pooched? Anything else I can check? Could it be cables?

There are no drive errors via the kernel or on the library.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-05 Thread rory_f


Jon LaBadie wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 02:57:01PM -0500, rory_f wrote:
 
  
  Hey guys. Thanks
  
  I checked my library GUI and for the tape run i was just talking about, 
  where it was stopping around 230gb, it seems compression WAS on. I turned 
  it off via mt and now the gui says off (after stopping the run obviously)
  
  I was *sure* i turned it off with mt before.  Im doing another amtapetype 
  now.
  
  And the comment regarding labeling: thanks. I'll most certainly relabel all 
  the tapes after this tapetype is done.
  
  Thanks again guys.
  
  
 
 Recalling your data in the original posting I think an amtapetype run was 
 estimated
 to take about 8 hours.  I think LTO drives are capable of writing a full tape 
 in
 about 1.5 hrs, amtapetype should do two full writes, thus about 3+ hours 
 total.
 
 As you system seems to be writing at less than 1/2 full speed, I wonder if it
 is failing to stream.  If an LTO drive is not streaming, is its capacity 
 affected
 by having large gaps caused by the start and stopping action?
 
 jl
 -- 
 Jon H. LaBadie  jon  at  jgcomp.com
 JG Computing
 12027 Creekbend Drive (703) 787-0884
 Reston, VA  20194 (703) 787-0922 (fax)


ok, so here is the latest one.

[ama...@backup tor]$ amtapetype -o -f /dev/nst0 -e 400G
Writing 1024 Mbyte   compresseable data:  32 sec
Writing 1024 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 32 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 25600 sec = 7 h 6 min
wrote 6815744 32 Kb blocks in 52 files in 5733 seconds (No space left on device)
wrote 6815744 32 Kb blocks in 104 files in 5959 seconds (No space left on 
device)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 212992 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 37322 kps
}

compression was set OFF in the gui for the library interfacing with the drive.

so, it seems, unless these tapes i have here are all pooched, the drive is 
giving me problems. ugh.

i'd try it on  our other drive but ... that's out being replaced ;-). maybe 
it's time to get this replaced too, while i still have the maintenance contract.

thanks for the help.. any further input on this is greatly appreciated!

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Amtapetype not returning right tape length?

2010-03-03 Thread rory_f

[ama...@backup tor]$ amtapetype -o -f /dev/nst0 -e 400G

Writing 1024 Mbyte   compresseable data:  31 sec
Writing 1024 Mbyte uncompresseable data: 32 sec
Estimated time to write 2 * 409600 Mbyte: 25600 sec = 7 h 6 min
wrote 6684672 32 Kb blocks in 51 files in 5871 seconds (No space left on device)
wrote 262144 32 Kb blocks in 4 files
wrote 7012352 32 Kb blocks in 107 files in 5952 seconds (No space left on 
device)
define tapetype unknown-tapetype {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 214016 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 37067 kps
}

I've done an amtapetype with this drive over a year ago and it returned  this 
tapetype (from amanda.conf)

define tapetype otherdrive {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 402432 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 67629 kps
}

The drive is an LTO3 HP drive.

Does this point to bad hardware? I tried two different tapes to run the 
tapetype - both with the same results. There are no errors in dmesg to report 
scsi problems during the test .. 

What else could it be?

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Recommend a SCSI card for Amanda/Linux use??

2009-08-06 Thread rory_f

Currently we are using this:

03:0c.0 SCSI storage controller: Adaptec AIC-7892A U160/m (rev 02)

And it is throwing up hardware errors every now and again so we want to grab 
another one to put in there. I understand it could also be cabling which is 
causing this and we'll address that too

We're using a fc7 box, 32 bit.

Can anyone recommend a card they have had good use out of ?

rory

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Specify DLE in amrecover, amidxtaped reports differently?

2009-05-07 Thread rory_f


rory_f wrote:
 Hi,
 
 amrecover sethost archive2.win.mrxfx.com
 200 Dump host set to archive2.win.mrxfx.com.
 amrecover setdisk /array/sata-1/xxx/WS039
 200 Disk set to /array/sata-1/xxx/WS039.
 
 but in the log for it, amidxtaped reports this:
 
 1241720675.702638: amidxtaped: disk = 
 '/array/sata-1/other/SHOTS/147Ax020'
 
 Why would that be? 
 
 Help ! thanks :)


Just to add, i checked the log file from index/archive2.win.mrxfx.com and the 
gz file has the correct file listing, all pertaining to WS039..

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Specify DLE in amrecover, amidxtaped reports differently?

2009-05-07 Thread rory_f

Hi,

amrecover sethost archive2.win.mrxfx.com
200 Dump host set to archive2.win.mrxfx.com.
amrecover setdisk /array/sata-1/xxx/WS039
200 Disk set to /array/sata-1/xxx/WS039.

but in the log for it, amidxtaped reports this:

1241720675.702638: amidxtaped: disk = 
'/array/sata-1/other/SHOTS/147Ax020'

Why would that be? 

Help ! thanks :)

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] amidxtaped errors

2009-04-17 Thread rory_f

[r...@backup tor]# cat amidxtaped.20090417114001.debug
1239982801.291428: amidxtaped: pid 3896 ruid 790 euid 790: start at Fri Apr 17 
11:40:01 2009
1239982801.291510: amidxtaped: amidxtaped: version 2.6.0p2
1239982806.292428: amidxtaped:  FEATURES=9ffe00
1239982806.294173: amidxtaped:  CONFIG=tor
1239982806.334057: amidxtaped:  LABEL=AmaTor-164:2
1239982806.334078: amidxtaped: append_to_tapelist(tapelist=(nil), 
label='AmaTor-164', file=-1, partnum=-1,  isafile=0)
1239982806.334096: amidxtaped: append_to_tapelist(tapelist=0x86eaf88, 
label='AmaTor-164', file=2, partnum=-1,  isafile=0)
1239982806.334115: amidxtaped:  FSF=2
1239982806.334129: amidxtaped:  HEADER
1239982806.334140: amidxtaped:  DEVICE=/dev/nst0
1239982806.334152: amidxtaped:  HOST=^mrx-storage3
1239982806.334166: amidxtaped:  DISK=^/array/x_ff4$
1239982806.334178: amidxtaped:  DATESTAMP=20090327102517
1239982806.334189: amidxtaped:  END
1239982806.336511: amidxtaped: pid 3896 ruid 790 euid 790: rename at Fri Apr 17 
11:40:06 2009
1239982806.336719: amidxtaped: Sending output to file descriptor 52
amidxtaped: Using tapedev /dev/nst0
/dev/nst0 uses deprecated device naming convention;
using tape:/dev/nst0 instead.
1239982806.338169: amidxtaped: device_read_label; mode = 0
1239982808.467833: amidxtaped: device_start mode = 1
1239982808.473085: amidxtaped: device_start done; dev-access_mode = 1, result 1
Scanning volume AmaTor-164
1239982808.473119: amidxtaped: search_a_tape: desired_tape=0x86eaf88 
label=AmaTor-164
1239982808.473131: amidxtaped: tape:   numfiles = 1
1239982808.473141: amidxtaped: tape:   files[0] = 2
1239982808.473151: amidxtaped: current tapefile_idx = 0
1239982859.274778: amidxtaped: Building type 3 (FILE) header of size 32768 
using:
1239982859.274815: amidxtaped: Contents of *(dumpfile_t *)0x8705408:
1239982859.274826: amidxtaped: type = 3 (FILE)
1239982859.274837: amidxtaped: datestamp= '20090327102517'
1239982859.274847: amidxtaped: dumplevel= 0
1239982859.274857: amidxtaped: compressed   = 0
1239982859.274867: amidxtaped: encrypted= 0
1239982859.274876: amidxtaped: comp_suffix  = 'N'
1239982859.274886: amidxtaped: encrypt_suffix   = ''
1239982859.274896: amidxtaped: name = 
'mrx-storage3.win.mrxfx.com'
1239982859.274906: amidxtaped: disk = '/array/x_ff4'
1239982859.274916: amidxtaped: program  = '/bin/tar'
1239982859.274940: amidxtaped: dumper   = ''
1239982859.274950: amidxtaped: srvcompprog  = ''
1239982859.274960: amidxtaped: clntcompprog = ''
1239982859.274969: amidxtaped: srv_encrypt  = ''
1239982859.274979: amidxtaped: clnt_encrypt = ''
1239982859.274989: amidxtaped: recover_cmd  = '/bin/tar -xpGf - ...'
1239982859.274999: amidxtaped: uncompress_cmd   = ''
1239982859.275008: amidxtaped: encrypt_cmd  = ''
1239982859.275018: amidxtaped: decrypt_cmd  = ''
1239982859.275028: amidxtaped: srv_decrypt_opt  = ''
1239982859.275037: amidxtaped: clnt_decrypt_opt = ''
1239982859.275047: amidxtaped: cont_filename= ''
1239982859.275056: amidxtaped: is_partial   = 0
1239982859.275066: amidxtaped: partnum  = 0
1239982859.275075: amidxtaped: totalparts   = 0
1239982859.275085: amidxtaped: blocksize= 32768
Error reading 32768 bytes from /dev/nst0: Input/output error

1239984420.786613: amidxtaped: Restoration finished
1239984420.78: amidxtaped: pid 3896 finish time Fri Apr 17 12:07:00 2009


What should i be looking at in this instance. The original backup logs did not 
report any errors while taping.  I'm assuming this is more hardware than 
software (gonna try another tape drive now) but anymore insight is appreciated.

Thanks

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f

hi,

we're trying to organise back up logs for our users to interface with and tell 
us when they need files restored from tape.

i've created all the listings from the index/ directory, made a copy, gzip -d'd 
them to get the filelisting for each entry - but i'm trying to find a way to 
figure out which shot is on which tape - amanda label and actual tape label

the smartest thing would have been to label the amanda tapes the same way our 
tapes are but ..  yeah. that didn't happen for a few reasons.

i know i can `amadmin tor find | grep DLE` to find the amanda tape, and then 
compare  that to changer-barcodes - but its a bit of a long process

does anyone have any ideas how to deal with such a problem?
thanks.

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:41 AM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  i know i can `amadmin tor find | grep DLE` to find the amanda tape, and 
  then compare  that to changer-barcodes - but its a bit of a long process
  
 
 I think that's the quickest way to map amanda labels to paper labels,
 unfortunately.
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Storage Software Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


i have this figured out..

dle=WS260; am=(`cat /usr/local/etc/amanda/tor/am_tor_find |grep $dle | awk 
'{print $6}'`); real=(`grep $am /usr/local/etc/amanda/tor/changer-barcodes|awk 
'{print $2}'`); echo $shot on tape $real($am)

WS260 on tape MRX316L3(AmaTor-130)

but my basic bash scripting only means its outputting one line of the `am` 
command while there is two.. need to figure out a way to output them all .. but 
thats a start :)

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:41 AM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  i know i can `amadmin tor find | grep DLE` to find the amanda tape, and 
  then compare  that to changer-barcodes - but its a bit of a long process
  
 
 I think that's the quickest way to map amanda labels to paper labels,
 unfortunately.
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Storage Software Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


how hard would it be to migrate our naming convention over to match our labels 
? is there any way of doing it?

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:52 PM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  how hard would it be to migrate our naming convention over to match our 
  labels ? is there any way of doing it?
  
 
 Well, the Amanda label is written on each tape, at the beginning -- so
 you'd need to do some tape-drive trickery to rewrite that
 (single-block) file without overwriting the following data.  I'm not
 sure tape drives can do that.
 
 The remaining adjustments in Amanda's metadata would be tricky, but
 not impossible (basically a global search-and-replace over all of
 Amanda's metadata would do the trick).
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Storage Software Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


Yeah
A lot more hassle than it is worth.

Which ever way i figure out is best i'll be sure to post here and let you guys 
know.. ;)

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f


Frank Smith wrote:
 rory_f wrote:
 
  Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
  
  how hard would it be to migrate our naming convention over to match
  our labels ? is there any way of doing it?
  
  
 
 If you're talking about changing barcodes to match Amanda's tape label,
 couldn't you just replace the barcodes on the tapes with ones matching
 your labels (possibly with a preceding digit added to ensure uniqueness
 (might have to tweak your labelstr regex to support it)? That way you
 wouldn't need to make any changes to Amanda except your barcodes file
 (if you configured your changer script to use one).
 
 Frank
 
 -- 
 Frank Smith  fsmith  at  hoovers.com
 Sr. Systems Administrator   Voice: 512-374-4673
 Hoover's Online   Fax: 512-374-4501


yeah that would work too :D

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] best way to organise tape file listings ?

2009-02-19 Thread rory_f


rory_f wrote:
 
 Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
  On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:52 PM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
  backupcentral.com wrote:
  
   how hard would it be to migrate our naming convention over to match our 
   labels ? is there any way of doing it?
   
  
  Well, the Amanda label is written on each tape, at the beginning -- so
  you'd need to do some tape-drive trickery to rewrite that
  (single-block) file without overwriting the following data.  I'm not
  sure tape drives can do that.
  
  The remaining adjustments in Amanda's metadata would be tricky, but
  not impossible (basically a global search-and-replace over all of
  Amanda's metadata would do the trick).
  
  Dustin
  
  -- 
  Storage Software Engineer
  http://www.zmanda.com
 
 
 Yeah
 A lot more hassle than it is worth.
 
 Which ever way i figure out is best i'll be sure to post here and let you 
 guys know.. ;)


I got a script working with php... shows the disklist then the label and the 
resulting tape. results like so:

[ama...@backup tor]$ ./figureouttapes.php |head
/array/sata-1/show/SHOTS/033x010
located on: AmaTor-002 MRX157L3
/array/sata-1/show/SHOTS/033x010
located on: AmaTor-003 MRX158L3
/array/sata-1/show/SHOTS/148Ax050
located on: AmaTor-003 MRX158L3
/array/sata-1/show/SHOTS/148Ax050
located on: AmaTor-004 MRX159L3
/array/sata-1/show/SHOTS/148Ax050
located on: AmaTor-005 MRX170L3
:D

+--
|This was sent by r...@mrxfx.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--




[Amanda-users] Restoring amanda tapes without amanda

2008-11-27 Thread rory_f

As amanda uses tar, you surely can restore a tape (or a portion of a tape, 
perhaps just a dle?) using the command line 'tar' command, right ?

Is it just the same as a normal extract ?  tar -xvf /dev/nst0 ?

Or do you have to do other things to ensure this works properly.

Nothing is wrong with my amanda configuration, but It's something i want to 
document for my own reference :)

Rory

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] Amanda using tapes in a very strange (and wrong) way

2008-11-13 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:26 PM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  i have a feeling it might be hardware too. im gonna try with _brand_ new 
  tapes tomorrow, to see if i cannot reproduce this..
  
 
 It looks like it might be a changer problem -- I'm seeing several:
 
 1226376231.524952: taper: changer: got exit: 2 str: none barcode
 MRX157L3 not found in mtx status output
 
 you should probably check the changer logfile to see if anything else
 appears there.  You may also want to increase the initial_poll_delay
 so that the changer waits longer for the next tape to appear.  Usually
 when we see this kind of problem, it occurs because the tape drive
 hasn't settled down by the time Amanda starts writing to it.
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Storage Software Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com
Dustin,

Ok i will try that.  I'll update you with anything else.

Thanks

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] Amanda using tapes in a very strange (and wrong) way

2008-11-12 Thread rory_f

Hi,

Amanda hasnt been acting as it should.  See the output of a failed dump below:

STATISTICS:
  Total   Full  Incr.
      
Estimate Time (hrs:min)0:04
Run Time (hrs:min) 3:07
Dump Time (hrs:min)5:03   5:03   0:00
Output Size (meg)  618864.1   618864.10.0
Original Size (meg)618864.1   618864.10.0
Avg Compressed Size (%) -- -- -- 
Filesystems Dumped   61 61  0
Avg Dump Rate (k/s) 34866.334866.3-- 

Tape Time (hrs:min)3:03   3:03   0:00
Tape Size (meg)446721.9   446721.90.0
Tape Used (%) 111.0  111.00.0
Filesystems Taped60 60  0

Chunks Taped 74 74  0
Avg Tp Write Rate (k/s) 41721.841721.8-- 

USAGE BY TAPE:
  LabelTime  Size  %NbNc
  AmaTor-040   3:05 462842042K  112.35960
  AmaTor-041   0:00 2912K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-043   0:0048576K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-044   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-045   0:00 3680K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-046   0:00 7840K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-047   0:0010848K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-048   0:0010048K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-049   0:00 3680K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-050   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-051   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-052   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-053   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-054   0:00 3296K0.0 0 1
  AmaTor-055   0:00 3456K0.0 1 1

Why is it writing all that data to the first tape, then failing to write more 
than 3-10mb on the rest of the tapes?

We have never observed this behaviour before.  Our DLE's are sizes ranging from 
1gb to 200gb, and we have been fine doing as such up until now.

We used root-tar on our DLE, taperalgo largestfit and dumporder TT - as 
from the amanda wiki.  We also tried reverting back to taperalgo first and 
dumporder sssS to see if this wuold make a difference and we still saw these 
errors.  

The only thing i can see from the amdump is:
driver: interface-state time 17584.842 if default: free 98976
driver: hdisk-state time 17584.842 hdisk 0: free 1420454186 dumpers 1
driver: result time 17584.842 from taper: NEW-TAPE 01-00121 AmaTor-054
Got EIO on /dev/nst0, assuming end of tape.
Error writing final filemark: Input/output error
Error writing final filemark: Input/output error

what does this suggest? the tapes need to be rewound? im doing so for our next 
(attempted) dump. im gonna go back to using'span' in our DLE too, as we never 
had this tape writing problem previously.

Please let me know if you need more info, 

thanks.

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] Amanda using tapes in a very strange (and wrong) way

2008-11-12 Thread rory_f


Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:01 PM, rory_f amanda-forum  at  
 backupcentral.com wrote:
 
  Amanda hasnt been acting as it should.  See the output of a failed dump 
  below:
  
 
 This actually looks like two other bugs we're in the process of
 chasing -- but may turn out to be totally unrelated.  Which Amanda
 version, and which OS, are you using?  Can you send along the taper
 debug log?
 
 Dustin
 
 -- 
 Storage Software Engineer
 http://www.zmanda.com


sure i can. give me an email.
im on linux, fedora core 7, using amanda-2.6.0p2/

im just wondering why it is has started happening now. 

in my case, because of:
driver: interface-state time 17584.842 if default: free 98976
driver: hdisk-state time 17584.842 hdisk 0: free 1420454186 dumpers 1
driver: result time 17584.842 from taper: NEW-TAPE 01-00121 AmaTor-054
Got EIO on /dev/nst0, assuming end of tape.
Error writing final filemark: Input/output error
Error writing final filemark: Input/output error

i have a feeling it might be hardware too. im gonna try with _brand_ new tapes 
tomorrow, to see if i cannot reproduce this..

but give me your email, i'll send a taper.

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-11-05 Thread rory_f

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)
using '/bin/gtar tf -  /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump  cat  
/tmp/amanda_amcheckdump'.
Validating image .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-11-05 Thread rory_f


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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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

[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-11-05 Thread rory_f


Paul Bijnens wrote:
 
 Indeed, use a changer and set runtapes to something greater than 1.
 Amanda will write a tape until she hits End Of Tape (signaled by a write
 error actually), and then move to a new tape. The whole backup image 
 will be restarted on the next tape.  (With using tape_splitsize you
 avoid starting the whole image, but start only the last chunk again)
 
 When using a holdingdisk, the dumps are collected in the holdingdisk
 unless the estimated backup image is larger than the holdingdisk.
 When one complete backup image is finished, Amanda start to put it on tape.
 Because many dumps can be collected simultaneously to holdingdisk,
 several of them may be waiting to be written to tape.  If there are 
 several to choose from, then the taperalgo setting decides which one 
 will get tried first. A good setting is largestfit (see the wiki url 
 above).  If no backupimage that is ready will fit in the estimated
 available tapespace, then amanda will try the smallest, which has
 the largest chance of fitting in the unknown free space.
 
 The free space at the end of a tape is indeed unknown, because
 tapes do not always have exactly the same length; and when using
 software compression, the remaining space is even more uncertain, 
 because it depends on the compressability of the previous tape images.


backup image, meaning DLE? so if it runs out of space, it will right, for 
instance, 35% of the DLE to the last bit of the tpae, then start again on the 
new tape, thus meaning all data, in teh end, will get written to tape.  and we 
can use amadmin conf find to see what tape the whole DLE was dumped to, right?

we currently have our runtapes to 28. as that is what our library can hold.

it all seems a lot clearer now. thanks

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-11-05 Thread rory_f


rory_f wrote:
 
 Paul Bijnens wrote:
  
  Indeed, use a changer and set runtapes to something greater than 1.
  Amanda will write a tape until she hits End Of Tape (signaled by a write
  error actually), and then move to a new tape. The whole backup image 
  will be restarted on the next tape.  (With using tape_splitsize you
  avoid starting the whole image, but start only the last chunk again)
  
  When using a holdingdisk, the dumps are collected in the holdingdisk
  unless the estimated backup image is larger than the holdingdisk.
  When one complete backup image is finished, Amanda start to put it on tape.
  Because many dumps can be collected simultaneously to holdingdisk,
  several of them may be waiting to be written to tape.  If there are 
  several to choose from, then the taperalgo setting decides which one 
  will get tried first. A good setting is largestfit (see the wiki url 
  above).  If no backupimage that is ready will fit in the estimated
  available tapespace, then amanda will try the smallest, which has
  the largest chance of fitting in the unknown free space.
  
  The free space at the end of a tape is indeed unknown, because
  tapes do not always have exactly the same length; and when using
  software compression, the remaining space is even more uncertain, 
  because it depends on the compressability of the previous tape images.
 
 
 backup image, meaning DLE? so if it runs out of space, it will right, for 
 instance, 35% of the DLE to the last bit of the tpae, then start again on the 
 new tape, thus meaning all data, in teh end, will get written to tape.  and 
 we can use amadmin conf find to see what tape the whole DLE was dumped to, 
 right?
 
 we currently have our runtapes to 28. as that is what our library can hold.
 
 it all seems a lot clearer now. thanks

just as something more to this. last night i backed up what i thought was 
~340gb. it was actually a lot more than that (3 tapes worth) - i did this for 
DLEs:

site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/020 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/030 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/040 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/050 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/001 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/014 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/S020 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/S035 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/S039 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/S040 root-tar
site.com /array/sata-1/aaa/S045 root-tar

and it ended up being about 1.3tb, so it went onto 3 tapes. i got errors doing 
amcheckdump but i succesfully restored files from the tapes. 

two of the DLE's got 'PARTIAL' then 'OK results in `amadmin tor find ` - so i 
am to assume they worked.

am i missing anything?

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-11-04 Thread rory_f

Hi guys,

any ideas??

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] amcheckdump output - questions :)

2008-10-30 Thread rory_f

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)
  using '/bin/gtar tf -  /tmp/amanda_amcheckdump  cat  
/tmp/amanda_amcheckdump'.
Validating image .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 .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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] Easiest way to create a full TOC of each tape?

2008-10-29 Thread rory_f

Hey guys,

How can this (see title) be done?

We need to have a full list of all directories sent to the tape for easy and 
quick restore process. 

Would a simple `dd if=/dev/nst0 bs=32k skip=1 |/bin/gtar -tvf -` output a 
full listing? 

Is there a program within amanda to do so?

I know there is the `tapecat` tool but this,when i ran it, did not output a 
full TOC.

Thanks.

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--




[Amanda-users] Question corrupt amanda backup / tape speed / etc..help!

2008-10-28 Thread rory_f

This is an edited version of a previous post


Hi,

We managed to up our speed of dumping and writing a whole lot by using a 
holding disk, which is great. However, the data we wrote, around 245gb, failed 
a amcheckdump and i couldnt, therefore, not amrestore anything.

After the amtapetest, i was given an output of this:

define tapetype ibm {
comment just produced by tapetype prog (hardware compression off)
length 402432 mbytes
filemark 0 kbytes
speed 57497 kps
}

However, it says in the amreport we wrote to tape at :
Avg Tp Write Rate (k/s) 90801.790801.7-- 
Here is some of our amdump output:
diver: result time 6482.541 from taper: PARTDONE 00-2 AmaTor-004 5 41943040 
[sec 449.501801 kb 41943040 kps 93310.059952]
driver: state time 6950.318 free kps: 10 space: 719002550 taper: writing 
idle-dumpers: 1 qlen tapeq: 0 runq: 0 roomq: 0 wakeup: 0 driver-idle: no-dumpers
driver: interface-state time 6950.318 if default: free 10
driver: hdisk-state time 6950.318 hdisk 0: free 719002550 dumpers 0
driver: result time 6950.332 from taper: PARTDONE 00-2 AmaTor-004 6 
41943040 [sec 466.669805 kb 41943040 kps 89877.338432]
driver: state time 7023.335 free kps: 10 space: 719002550 taper: writing 
idle-dumpers: 1 qlen tapeq: 0 runq: 0 roomq: 0 wakeup: 0 driver-idle: no-dumpers
driver: interface-state time 7023.335 if default: free 10
driver: hdisk-state time 7023.335 hdisk 0: free 719002550 dumpers 0
driver: result time 7023.350 from taper: PARTDONE 00-2 AmaTor-004 7 5813290 
[sec 71.901664 kb 5813290 kps 80850.562791]
driver: state time 7023.350 free kps: 10 space: 719002550 taper: writing 
idle-dumpers: 1 qlen tapeq: 0 runq: 0 roomq: 0 wakeup: 0 driver-idle: no-dumpers
driver: interface-state time 7023.350 if default: free 10
driver: hdisk-state time 7023.350 hdisk 0: free 719002550 dumpers 0


How can this be? our holding disk is a sata1, 1tb disk. That write rate is 
above what sata1 can give data out at, right? is this the reason for our data 
corruption?

What else could it be? Do you need anymoer info to help diagnose this? We're 
gonna hopefully try with a sata2 disk soon to see if that makes any difference. 
The tapespeed variable in amanda.conf, to my understanding, would not allow me 
to write at 9k~. Nor would the speed of a sata1  disk.

+--
|This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+--