> >
> > What a poor hardware configuration I have here....
>
> Indeed. What *is* your SCSI config. In general, you probably want the
> tape drive at least on its own channel, if not its own card.
>
It is BAD!
OK at least my tape drive is on its own card.
But, when we purchased the backup server I agreed to follow my boss' solution (it's always him you known ;-p) to buy that cheaper server with maximum 1,5TB RAID5 (6*300GB) instead of that nice DAS with up to 3,9TB RAID5. So, to save space I created one big volume containing both the OS and the data.
I guess that's the reason why I have so poor performances with "dd if=/dev/sda2 ... bs=2048k" (where /dev/sda2 is the OS).
So, I think I will have to go into a complete hardware configuration change... BTW, in order to finally have a good configuration, I have started another thread about holding disk. But it seems the list cannot keep the pace with me sending so much requests :-). The question was simple (the answer maybe not but...):
In a configuration where amanda only backup local (SCSI) drives, are there any benefits from using a holding disk?
Best regards,
Cyrille
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-shinning Cyrille Bollu
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-shinning Joshua Baker-LePain
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-shinn... Michael Loftis
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-s... Joshua Baker-LePain
- Re: tar's default block size & sh... Michael Loftis
- Re: tar's default block size & sh... Cyrille Bollu
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-shinn... Cyrille Bollu
- Re: tar's default block size & shoe-s... Joshua Baker-LePain
- Re: tar's default block size & sh... Cyrille Bollu
- Re: tar's default block size &am... Joshua Baker-LePain
- Re: tar's default block size... Cyrille Bollu
