>Hmm. Thinking out loud now, I guess I'm wondering what amanda does
>if you have a locally attached tape device on every client, and the
>amanda server just instructs every client to backup to the local
>device. (But the amanda server keeps the index, right?) Can amanda
>do this?
No. That's not Amanda. It will take some major rethinking of how
Amanda works to bend it into this shape.
>In other words, if I have 12 machines and 3 tape drives (and the
>tape drives are visible from all twelve machines), I could probably
>have three scripts starting at the same time, that each rsh into 1/3 of
>the NFS servers and instruct it to dump to a specific (non-rewinding) tape
>device.
It seems to me what you want to do is set up an Amanda configuration
on each and every machine, then write a changer script that knows about
all of the machines and allocates a drive on request, pausing all other
requests until a drive is available. Then each Amanda server will only
back up itself and it will do it directly to the FC attached drive.
>... and I'd also like to have amanda manage the tape drives as well.
A changer script to do this would not be difficult. The trivial approach
would be first come, first serve, but if you want to add some intelligence
based on biggest (estimated) size first, that should be do-able as well.
>Argh. Something else entirely just occurred to me-- if I have a 500 GB
>partition, amanda still doesn't split dumps across tapes, does it?
I'm literally coding this feature right now (when I'm not answering a
few hundred amanda-users E-mails per day :-).
I'll be looking for beta testers soon. How brave are you??? :-)
>-ron
John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
