On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 03:20:09PM -0500, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote: > On 12/19/2014 02:39 PM, Jon LaBadie wrote: > >Following and researching Debra Baddorf's thread raised some questions > >in my mind. In one posting, JLM said: > > > >On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 01:16:32PM -0500, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote: > > ... > >>It autoflush is set, they should be flushed first. > >>All flush are done in increasing dumptime order. > >1. With autoflush set, are flushing old dumps and taping new dumps > >done in separate "phases", say flush and taper? > no, at the beginning, all flush are added to the tape queue, like new dump > once on holding disk. > > That flushing > >ignores the taperalgo setting would imply this. Does flushing > >follow date/time order while taper follows taperalgo? > date order first, then taperflush for those with the same date. > > If new > >dumps are available before flushing old dumps is completed, are > >the new dumps ignored til the taper phase? > nothing is ignored, they are put in the tape queue, and flushed in date > order.
Thanks. Do you mean date only, or date/time order? I'm guessing date only otherwise taperalgo would have little or no effect. If date only, that could have implications for Debra's scheme. After the main dumps are completed, she wishes to do additional dumps meant to go at the beginning of the "next day's tape". The dumps left on on the holding disk could have the same date as the first new dumps added to the holding disk. > > > >2. Starting a new tape during the taper phase is affected by the > >two "flush-threshold-*" settings. With autoflush set, are the > >flush-threshold-* settings ignored? > yes > > I.e. is a new tape started > >regardless of the amount of old dump data on the holding disk? > no > > I thought these were the same question asked different ways. Why the different answers? > >4. The amanda.conf(5) description of the two parameters contain > >this wording: > > > > flush-threshold-dumped: > > The value of this parameter may not exceed than that of the > > flush-threshold-scheduled parameter. > > > > flush-threshold-scheduled: > > The value of this parameter may not be less than that of the > > flush-threshold-dumped ... parameters. > > > >Only an equal value for both parameters meets these requirements. > >Is there an error in the description? If not, why two separate > >parameters? > I read it as: flush-threshold-dumped <= flush-threshold-scheduled > > flush-threshold-dumped count only the dumps already on holding disk > flush-threshold-scheduled count the dumps already on holding disk + the > scheduled dump > > Setting flush-threshold-scheduled < flush-threshold-dumped is the same as > setting it to 0 (not use) My bad, of course f-t-s could be larger than f-t-d. You might want to start a new tape if 50% of a tape is already dumped, or if already dumped plus scheduled to be dumped is 80% of a tape. Jon -- Jon H. LaBadie [email protected] 11226 South Shore Rd. (703) 787-0688 (H) Reston, VA 20190 (703) 935-6720 (C)
