Re: planner timeouts and udp packet size

2005-12-07 Thread Paul Bijnens

Jon LaBadie wrote:

On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:06:19PM -0500, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:


I've got this amanda client (server and client at v2.4.5) with a 1.5TB
raid splitted/chunked in ~70 DLEs (using gtar) and some of them don't
make it to tape as the planner timeouts. Now, would someone be kind
enough to jolt my memory as to what is the relationship between UDP
packet size and the number/size of DLEs entries along with their

...



From a Dec. 2004 reply by Paul Bijenes:


Wow, you surely have a large mail archive.  I didn't have that message 
anymore.


The last updated (5 minutes ago) explanatin is found here:

http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Why_does_%27amdump%27_report_%60results_missing%27%3F#UDP_packet_too_large.3F

or shorter:

http://tinyurl.com/ca7pv


--
Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel  +32 16 397.511
Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax  +32 16 397.512
http://www.xplanation.com/  email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
* I think I've got the hang of it now:  exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, ^^, *
* F6, quit, ZZ, :q, :q!, M-Z, ^X^C, logoff, logout, close, bye, /bye, *
* stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt,  abort,  hangup, *
* PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e,  kill -1 $$,  shutdown, *
* init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... *
* ...  Are you sure?  ...   YES   ...   Phew ...   I'm out  *
***




Re: planner timeouts and udp packet size

2005-12-07 Thread Jean-Francois Malouin
* Paul Bijnens [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20051207 07:41]:
 Jon LaBadie wrote:
 On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:06:19PM -0500, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:
 
 I've got this amanda client (server and client at v2.4.5) with a 1.5TB
 raid splitted/chunked in ~70 DLEs (using gtar) and some of them don't
 make it to tape as the planner timeouts. Now, would someone be kind
 enough to jolt my memory as to what is the relationship between UDP
 packet size and the number/size of DLEs entries along with their
 ...
 
 From a Dec. 2004 reply by Paul Bijenes:
 
 Wow, you surely have a large mail archive.  I didn't have that message 
 anymore.
 
 The last updated (5 minutes ago) explanatin is found here:
 
 http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Why_does_%27amdump%27_report_%60results_missing%27%3F#UDP_packet_too_large.3F
 
 or shorter:
 
 http://tinyurl.com/ca7pv

Thank you all for the help.

I found that the udp reply packet is short of 37 bytes from 32Kb
taking into account the IP and UPD encapsulation and I can't seem to
find what the max size of udp packet on irix6.5 -- anyone knows? All I
can gather from systune (kernel tunable utilities on irix) is
udp_sendspace = 61440 (0xf000) 60Kb

Anyways, I modified the dumptypes to use exclude list on the client
and now I'm below the udp request from last night is ~27Kb and I see
no timeouts but my exclude fails :( 
Ah, well... I'll post another question when I'm sure that I haven't
made (yet) another stupid mistake...

regards,
jf

 
 
 -- 
 Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel  +32 16 397.511
 Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax  +32 16 397.512
 http://www.xplanation.com/  email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***
 * I think I've got the hang of it now:  exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, ^^, *
 * F6, quit, ZZ, :q, :q!, M-Z, ^X^C, logoff, logout, close, bye, /bye, *
 * stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt,  abort,  hangup, *
 * PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e,  kill -1 $$,  shutdown, *
 * init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... *
 * ...  Are you sure?  ...   YES   ...   Phew ...   I'm out  *
 ***
 

-- 
° 


Re: planner timeouts and udp packet size

2005-12-07 Thread Jean-Francois Malouin
Replying to myself,

* Jean-Francois Malouin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20051207 16:03]:
 * Paul Bijnens [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20051207 07:41]:
  Jon LaBadie wrote:
  On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:06:19PM -0500, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:
  
  I've got this amanda client (server and client at v2.4.5) with a 1.5TB
  raid splitted/chunked in ~70 DLEs (using gtar) and some of them don't
  make it to tape as the planner timeouts. Now, would someone be kind
  enough to jolt my memory as to what is the relationship between UDP
  packet size and the number/size of DLEs entries along with their
  ...
  
  From a Dec. 2004 reply by Paul Bijenes:
  
  Wow, you surely have a large mail archive.  I didn't have that message 
  anymore.
  
  The last updated (5 minutes ago) explanatin is found here:
  
  http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Why_does_%27amdump%27_report_%60results_missing%27%3F#UDP_packet_too_large.3F
  
  or shorter:
  
  http://tinyurl.com/ca7pv
 
 Thank you all for the help.
 
 I found that the udp reply packet is short of 37 bytes from 32Kb
 taking into account the IP and UPD encapsulation and I can't seem to
 find what the max size of udp packet on irix6.5 -- anyone knows? All I
 can gather from systune (kernel tunable utilities on irix) is
 udp_sendspace = 61440 (0xf000) 60Kb
 
 Anyways, I modified the dumptypes to use exclude list on the client
 and now I'm below the udp request from last night is ~27Kb and I see
 no timeouts but my exclude fails :( 
 Ah, well... I'll post another question when I'm sure that I haven't
 made (yet) another stupid mistake...

stupid it was indeed:
I had an extra white space in front of every exclude pattern...

jf

 
 regards,
 jf
 
  
  
  -- 
  Paul Bijnens, XplanationTel  +32 16 397.511
  Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUMFax  +32 16 397.512
  http://www.xplanation.com/  email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***
  * I think I've got the hang of it now:  exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, ^^, *
  * F6, quit, ZZ, :q, :q!, M-Z, ^X^C, logoff, logout, close, bye, /bye, *
  * stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt,  abort,  hangup, *
  * PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e,  kill -1 $$,  shutdown, *
  * init 0, kill -9 1, Alt-F4, Ctrl-Alt-Del, AltGr-NumLock, Stop-A, ... *
  * ...  Are you sure?  ...   YES   ...   Phew ...   I'm out  *
  ***
  
 


planner timeouts and udp packet size

2005-12-06 Thread Jean-Francois Malouin
Hi,

I've got this amanda client (server and client at v2.4.5) with a 1.5TB
raid splitted/chunked in ~70 DLEs (using gtar) and some of them don't
make it to tape as the planner timeouts. Now, would someone be kind
enough to jolt my memory as to what is the relationship between UDP
packet size and the number/size of DLEs entries along with their
exclude list? The FAQ mentions something about this (UDP packet size
of 64Kb and results missing) but that might not be quite up to date. 

This raid partition has been splitted using quite a few 'exclude
append ./blah' in the disklist and I wonder if it would be better to
have them in a file on the client side rather than explicitely in the
disklist file per se. Would that make any difference at all regarding
what get stuffed in the UDP packets at the estimate phase -- making
them smaller -- so that I wouldn't hit that hard limit?

I hope this makes sense :)

TIA,
jf


Re: planner timeouts and udp packet size

2005-12-06 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:06:19PM -0500, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:
 Hi,
 
 I've got this amanda client (server and client at v2.4.5) with a 1.5TB
 raid splitted/chunked in ~70 DLEs (using gtar) and some of them don't
 make it to tape as the planner timeouts. Now, would someone be kind
 enough to jolt my memory as to what is the relationship between UDP
 packet size and the number/size of DLEs entries along with their
 exclude list? The FAQ mentions something about this (UDP packet size
 of 64Kb and results missing) but that might not be quite up to date. 
 
 This raid partition has been splitted using quite a few 'exclude
 append ./blah' in the disklist and I wonder if it would be better to
 have them in a file on the client side rather than explicitely in the
 disklist file per se. Would that make any difference at all regarding
 what get stuffed in the UDP packets at the estimate phase -- making
 them smaller -- so that I wouldn't hit that hard limit?
 

From a Dec. 2004 reply by Paul Bijenes:

||
|| The problem seems to be in the reply packet.
|| 
|| I've already seen problems with a UDP-packet overflow, but that's
|| unlikely.  That problem happened with older versions where the UDP
|| size was only 8Kbyte or so. Currently it is 64K, but it could be
|| limited by the OS too, of course.  The reply packet is usually larger
|| than the request packet, because it contains 1 to 3 lines for each
|| DLE (level 0, current level, current plus 1).
||

-- 
Jon H. LaBadie  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 JG Computing
 4455 Province Line Road(609) 252-0159
 Princeton, NJ  08540-4322  (609) 683-7220 (fax)