On 10/01/2012 10:50 AM, Attila Bogár wrote:
Hi Jean-Louis,
On 01/10/12 15:16, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
I do not understand the problem, one tape is write-propected, so
amanda use another tape. Wha'ts wrong?
Snippets from amanda email reports:
--
Date : September 25, 2012
These dumps were to tapes Daily-23, Daily-24.
Not using all tapes because 2 tapes filled; runtapes=2 does not allow
additional tapes.
There are 453805M of dumps left in the holding disk.
They will be flushed on the next run.
The next 2 tapes Amanda expects to use are: Daily-24, Daily-25.
-- next
Date : September 26, 2012
These dumps were to tape Daily-24.
*** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [No acceptable volumes found].
There are 1041362M of dumps left in the holding disk.
They will be flushed on the next run.
The next 2 tapes Amanda expects to use are: Daily-24, Daily-25.
-- next
Date : September 27, 2012
These dumps were to tape Daily-24.
*** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [No acceptable volumes found].
There are 1092801M of dumps left in the holding disk.
They will be flushed on the next run.
The next 2 tapes Amanda expects to use are: Daily-24, Daily-25.
Question 2: Why amanda taper did not abort when it saw a protected
tape?
Why it should not use another tape?
The goal of amanda is to do backup, it try as much as possible to do it.
Amanda was not "confident" I would say.
She said the dump was to Daily-24, however on the other hand it
RE-EXPECTED Daily-24 again for next day.
So the bug is that amanda reported:
These dumps were to tape Daily-24.
which is not true since amanda did not succeed to write to it.
Can you post the log.<datestamp>.0, the taper.<timestamp>.debug files
and the amdump.X file for one of the run?
Jean-Louis
