Expanding on JLM's accurate comment. On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:07:45AM -0400, Steven Settlemyre wrote: > I am looking to restore a disk from one of my machines and am having a > little trouble understanding which report to believe. Using amadmin > find, I see there was a level 0 on 4/12 and again on 4/19. > > When I look at the daily reports I see on 4/12: > > pop:/files1.0 in-memory > taper: no split_diskbuffer specified: using fallback split size of 10240kb > to buffer
I'm guessing you did specify a split_diskbuffer later on, before 4/19. Since no split_diskbuffer was specified, tiny pieces of 10MB were used resulting in 973 pieces. > and > > HOSTNAME DISK L ORIG-kB OUT-kB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s > MMM:SS KB/s > -------------------------- ------------------------------------------- > ------------- > pop /files1 0 17024192 9961504 58.5 178:38 926.5 178:39 > 929.4 > > > Then on 4/19 i see: > > NOTES: > planner: Incremental of pop:/files1 bumped to level 3. > Planning goes through many steps, one is to decide whether to bump to a higher level if an incremental is done. It was planning to do so. But at a later step, other considerations superceded this because: > and > > HOSTNAME DISK L ORIG-kB OUT-kB COMP% MMM:SS KB/s > MMM:SS KB/s > -------------------------- ------------------------------------------- > ------------- > pop /files1 0 17089120 9965664 58.3 148:35 1117.9 30:39 5418.9 > > So is 4/19 a level 3 or level 0? As clearly shown, a level 0 was done. Would you really expect your level 3 incremental, not even a level 1 or 2, to be the same size as you 4/12 level 0? > > Also, in the amadmin find, I see that 4/12 has 973 parts, whereas 4/19 > only has 2 parts. > > Why the big difference? What could cause such things? and what steps > should i take to restore this disk? > Two pieces or 1000 would be no different. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road (609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
