On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:27:18PM -0500, Matt Hyclak wrote: > You're getting your math confused, I think. If your tapetype defines > compression, then what is in your holding disk is already compressed. Your > tape drive should be in non-compression mode then and should hold 20GB of > *already compressed* data. What space that data takes up when uncompressed > should be close to 40GB, but depends on how well it compressed. If I > remember correctly, amanda had already written about 10GB of *already > compressed* data to the drive, and was then trying to write a 20GB > *uncompressed* partition after that. Amanda thought that the 20GB would > compress to 10GB and therefore fit on the 20GB capacity tape, but she was > wrong. So, if she had been able to get it all on there, you would have had > about 20GB of already compressed data, which would expand to about 40GB when > uncompressed.
OK, now *here's* an explanation that made its' way through my thick skull! :-) Thanks, Matt. I'm not sure if I fell more or less stupid now... :-) -- John Oliver, CCNA http://www.john-oliver.net/ Linux/UNIX/network consulting http://www.john-oliver.net/resume/ *** sendmail, Apache, ftp, DNS, spam filtering *** **** Colocation, T1s, web/email/ftp hosting ****
