* Chris Howells schrieb am 18.09.07 um 16:14 Uhr:
> Hi,
>
> Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>
> Finally got around to messing around with bacula again...
>
> > The manual says that nnn being the same number for both settings
> > means "fixed" blocksize.
> >
> > As I understand it, your solutions should be to just set the
> > "Minimum Block Size" so you get a good perfromance.
> >
> > Minimum Block Size = 1048576
>
> Unfortunately just setting a Minimum Block Size does not work. btape for
> instance will not work then. It dies with a glibc error. (See end of
> mail for full trace.
>
> For instance with the following setting:
>
> Minimum Block Size = 256000
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/etc/bacula# btape -c bacula-sd.conf /dev/nst0
> <snip>
> test
> <snip>
> *** glibc detected *** malloc(): memory corruption: 0x080d9d90 ***
>
> Setting both a Minimum Block Size and Maximum Block Size to the same
> value *does* seems to work with btape.
>
> BTW, I tried using 1048576. Unfortunately this does not work. From
> src/stored/dev.c:
>
> if (dev->max_block_size > 1000000) {
> Jmsg3(jcr, M_ERROR, 0, _("Block size %u on device %s is too
> large, using default %u\n"),
> dev->max_block_size, dev->print_name(), DEFAULT_BLOCK_SIZE);
>
> Oops.
>
> Why can I not use > 1000000 bytes? This seems a *really* strange
> restriction. I can happily use blocks of several megabytes using tar.
Indeed.
I discuss that on the devel list and/or maybe open a
bugreport in the bacula BTS.
And btape crashing is a bug as well...
-Marc
--
BUGS My programs never have bugs. They just develop random
features. If you discover such a feature and you want it to
be removed: please send an email
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
