On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I've got a server farm of about 30 machines, most on various RedHat > distributions, a few AIX. > I have 3 tape drives, an 8, a 24 and a 40Gig, all HP DAT tapes. > I have 10 physical backup tapes available for each drive. > The tape drives are attached to 3 linux computers, Columbia, Frith & Coffee, > respectively, which have Amanda 2.4.1p1 servers. All the clients are > running either 2.4.1p1 or 2.4.2p2 . > > I have created a configuration directory for each server in /var/lib/amanda > and a disklist which has the clients and partitions for each item to > be backed up by the respective server. > > When I analyze the existing space used by the clients, I find that > each server is subscribed for between 100 and 180% of the capacity of > an individual tape. > > Questions: > - is this a sane configuration? > - is this a better configuration than throwing 3 tape drives on 1 amanda server? > - is this a better configuration than just using 1 tape drive on 1 amanda server >(the 40, obviously) and using more tapes? > - what would you recommend for the way to ease into backing up this lot? > i.e. uncomment 1/2 of the disklist descriptions the first night, 1/2 the > second, or 1/4 the first, for 4 days... or ??? > >
You didn't specify why you might want to be using the 2 smaller tape drives -- other than the drives are there and feel guilty about them gathering dust ;) However, if you can get more 40Gb tapes, using a single drive would probably be the easiest route for you to go. As for the distlist, you can do that or just let a few fail for the first few days while Amanda adjusts to it's schedule. Sane? I wouldn't make a judgement on what is and isn't sane. You might as well ask about vi vs emacs, bash vs tcsh .... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Doug Silver Network Manager Urchin Corporation http://www.urchin.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
