DING DING DING I do understand now.
I've got some planning to do. Craig Hancock On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:22:02AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 10:41:05PM -0500, Craig Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] >wrote: > > John please forgive my assumptions. But I still don't understand. > > If tapecycles are defined by number of tapes. How is possible to double > > runspercycle if its meaurement is in weeks. > > dumpcycle takes a unit (days, weeks, ...) > tapecycle is a unitless number > runspercycle is a unitless number > > If your dumpcycle is 4 weeks, meaning 4 weeks maximum between level 0's, > then runspercycle is the number of amdump runs you schedule during those > 4 weeks. > > If you are doing 6 dumps per week, with a dumpcycle of 4 weeks, > your runspercycle is 24. At 5 per week it would be 20. At > two backups each day it would be 56. > > The number of tapes in circulation (tapecycle) is recommended to be > 2 or more times the runspercycle. It MUST be at least equal to runspercycle. > Those that live dangerously make it runspercycle plus 1. More conservative > administrators, and those that like to have older backups still around for > a while chose much larger multipliers. My own tapecycle is 4x runspercycle. > So I have 4 dumpcycles "on the shelf". > -- > Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] > JG Computing > 4455 Province Line Road (609) 252-0159 > Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax) -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9P+Y5awsElDuSDs0RAgxoAJ40NBfXWSP5dwsRK6AWZRXP6fNm+wCgpWf4 MwLEwsq3TDVGR8ntq3+w65k= =qTeY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
