...yes...you're right....I've never noticed the "Archive device = ..." discussion about Solaris.... :(
Sorry but, looking at what happened to me, probably the "Archive device = ..." seems to be
the last thing one may lookt at in such a situation.
The section "Tips on resolving problems" seems to be the first thing to look at.
So maybe, where you talk about the "fixed-block-size" problems, you may also mention
the Sun situation and link back to the "Archive device = ..." page.
Just a suggestion. :)
Thanx again.
Gabriele.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Da: Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Gabriele Bulfon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Data: 11 aprile 2006 16.24.03 CEST
Oggetto: Re: [Bacula-users] Re: Solaris Device problem SOLVED
Sorry but, looking at what happened to me, probably the "Archive device = ..." seems to be
the last thing one may lookt at in such a situation.
The section "Tips on resolving problems" seems to be the first thing to look at.
So maybe, where you talk about the "fixed-block-size" problems, you may also mention
the Sun situation and link back to the "Archive device = ..." page.
Just a suggestion. :)
Thanx again.
Gabriele.
|
|
|
Gabriele Bulfon - Sonicle S.r.l. Tel +39 028246016 Int. 30 - Fax +39 028243880 Via Felice Cavallotti 16 - 20089, Rozzano - Milano - ITALY http://www.sonicle.com |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Da: Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Gabriele Bulfon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Data: 11 aprile 2006 16.24.03 CEST
Oggetto: Re: [Bacula-users] Re: Solaris Device problem SOLVED
After taking a look at the manual again, I don't think there is any need to
change anything. This problem is *very* clearly explained in the section that
describes "Archive device = ..." for the Storage daemon conf file. I suppose
I could possibly add a warning in the installation section, but the manual is
already quite large :-)
On Tuesday 11 April 2006 15:57, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 April 2006 13:14, Gabriele Bulfon wrote:
> > Maybe this is a silly discovery, but I did not find any writing about it
> > anywhere, so I'm sending you the solution. Maybe would be nice to have a
> > mention on the pdf documentation. Running Bacula on Solaris : you HAVE to
> > use the "b" device on tapes! Read the Solaris 10 mtio man page extract:
> > Read Operation
> > The read(2) function reads the next record on the tape. The
> > record size is passed back as the number of bytes read, pro-
> > vided it is not greater than the number requested. When a
> > tape mark or end of data is read, a zero byte count is
> > returned; all successive reads after the zero read will
> > return an error and errno will be set to EIO. To move to the
> > next file, an MTFSF ioctl can be issued before or after the
> > read causing the error. This error handling behavior is dif-
> > ferent from the older BSD behavior, where another read will
> > fetch the first record of the next tape file. If the BSD
> > behavior is required, device names containing the letter b
> > (for BSD behavior) in the final component should be used. If
> > persistent error handling was enabled with either the BSD or
> > SVR4 tape device behavior, all operations after this read
> > error will return EIO errors until the MTIOCLRERR ioctl is
> > issued. An MTFSF ioctl can then he issued.
>
> Yes, this *is* in the manual (in the Tape Testing chapter), but perhaps I
> could stress the /dev/rmt/0b for Solaris systems a bit more.
>
> Anyway, I am happy you found the solution ...
>
> > Now, using /dev/rmt/0b will run the tests perfectly.
> > If you use /dev/rmt/0 :
> > - Test will not work
> > - Bacula will correctly write
> > - bconsole will correctly read, because it knows exactly the file number
> > to reach, and ask the device to skip there before reading - command line
> > utilities won't work, beacuse they will fail discovery of content after
> > reaching the end of file=1 Previous tapes that I have written using
> > /dev/rmt/0 can be read through /dev/rmt/0b, but may mislead you. Trying
> > an "bls -j -v -V ..." on the old tape will show the first start of job,
> > and then come out with a lot of: 11-Apr 13:03 bls: Got EOF at file 1 on
> > device /dev/rmt/0b, Volume "THURSDAY2" 11-Apr 13:03 bls: Got EOF at file
> > 2 on device /dev/rmt/0b, Volume "THURSDAY2" ....
> > ....
> > You just have to wait. The rest of data has been written into later
> > files. Then you can create your bootstrap file and suggest bextract where
> > to position. Hope this helps,
>
> Yes, I will put this information in the manual.
>
> > Gabriele.
> > Gabriele Bulfon - Sonicle S.r.l.
> > Tel +39 028246016 Int. 30 - Fax +39 028243880
> > Via Felice Cavallotti 16 - 20089, Rozzano - Milano - ITALY
> > http://www.sonicle.com
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
