Jon,
* Jon LaBadie <[email protected]> [20100827 14:05]:
> Perhaps my memory is slipping, but I recall amanda
> would use a new tape if it encountered one. I.e.
> it wouldn't search for the specific tape in the
> past rotation if it encountered a new tape first.
>
> The current release of amanda seems to ignore all
> new tapes even if there are a hundred new, labelled
> tapes.
I started a thread on this called 'No acceptable volumes found'
in August. You might want to read it.
I had the same problem you mention: after adding 30 new tapes
to the tapecycle amanda was still refusing to use them and prefered
the old already written tapes...
>
> I've typically configured amanda with tapecycle a
> few less than the number actually labelled and in
> rotation. An benefit this obtains is when a tape
> goes bad, or otherwise is missing, amanda does
> not have to go into degraded mode because no
> usable tape is found.
>
> Was this an intentional change in taper policy?
>From what I understand from Dustin in the above mentionned thread is
that the taper scanner algorithm ('traditional') is doing what it says
and that I (and you) were living out of an undocumented feature from
the previous versions...
regards,
jf
>
> --
> Jon H. LaBadie [email protected]
> JG Computing
> 12027 Creekbend Drive (703) 787-0884
> Reston, VA 20194 (703) 787-0922 (fax)
--
<° >< Jean-François Malouin McConnell Brain Imaging Centre
Systems/Network Administrator Montréal Neurological Institute
3801 Rue University, Suite WB219 Montréal, Québec, H3A 2B4
Phone: 514-398-8924 Fax: 514-398-8948
