> That would be a harsh rule to enforce. I think that depends on which you consider more important: (a) to back up tonight, or (b) to ensure that yesterday's state is re-achievable in the event of disaster even if that means losing today's work. I think (b).
> Suppose my small company > backs up 7 desktop computers. If one DLE on the next tape was > the last level 0, what should amanda do during that amdump? > It can't "tape around" the problem dump file. I guess you think (a). Fair enough. > Should it skip the dump leaving lots of new stuff not backed up? > > Go into degraded mode and hope the holding disk will hold all > the forced incrementals? > > Copy the file from the tape to some archive area, hopefully > with sufficient space. Either of the first two (plus a "your backups failed" email) would be fine by me. The third option sounds like a second (v)tape library, which, if we had one, we'd allocate in the first place. > IIRC, amcheck does give warnings about the impending situation. > I'd say it is up to the admin to decide how to handle it. Ahh ... good! Still, it would be awful to come back from a long holiday, and discover that, despite those warnings, the only full backup *had* been overwritten and that the system itself had then died of disk failure. I guess the only option is to have a tapecycle big enough to cover all eventualities, as the Tapecyle wiki page suggests. Thanks for the feedback! Alexis
