Jon LaBadie wrote: > On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 10:39:16PM -0400, Robert Kuropkat wrote: >> Did something bad, but not sure what. I had a tape with a bar code >> label but apparently no Amanda label. So I labeled it and hoped the >> next backup would write to it. It did not. It was tape #28 and I had >> already passed that number in the sequence (Tape #30). So I figured I >> did something goofy and just loaded the next set. Unfortunately, it >> still says it needs a new tape. >> >> Unfortunately, I was confident I knew what I was doing, so I also made >> other changes while I was there. I had taken the top 10 tapes out of >> the sequence reducing it from 100 to 90. So I took the top ten entries >> out of the tapelist file and changed the tapecycle entry in amanda.conf >> to 90. >> >> I'm new to Amanda and inherited this setup so aside from posting every >> config file, I'm not sure what the relevant entries to post would be. >> > > Couple of things. First the entries in the tapelist file can be > active or inactive as indicated by the "reuse/noreuse" tag. If > you are getting a "need a new tape" message, the number of "reuse" > tapes is less than the tapecycle value. > > Second, tapecycle need not match the actual number of tapes > in rotation. It must be equal to or less. By having it less, > when a tape is damaged or archived (and marked "noreuse" in > tapelist) you will not get the dreaded "need a new tape". > > Third, amanda does not use the tapes in human defined numeric > order. If it originally saw the tapes in the order 1,3,5,99, > that is the order it will expect them in the future. And there > are several ways the expected order can be affected later on. > > So, even thought tape 30 has been passed, tape 28's turn may > be coming up. Alternatively, as you labelled it just recently, > it may be the "new tape" that amanda is seeking. If there > are 90 tapes listed as "reuse" in tapelist and tape 28 is the > only one without a date last used, that is likely the case. > > jl
ooh, I think you nailed it. One of the reasons I was taking the top 10 out of the cycle was because I wanted to fill in some holes where tapes had gotten damaged and because I had 6 sets of 15 and 1 set of 10 tapes. Unfortunately, I had not yet added those tapes in so I had a tape cycle of 90 and only 87 tapes in the tape list. Running it now to see if that works. If so, I will add a couple more tapes at the top of the list again to prevent this in the future. Thanks! Robert Kuropkat
