LaValley, Brian E wrote:
I have a Fedora Core 3 amanda server. I have specified an nfs mounted
directory for one of the holding disks. Does anyone know why amcheck finds
much less space available on this drive than a command like 'df' does?
You need to explain a little more. amcheck checks
Paul Bijnens wrote:
LaValley, Brian E wrote:
I have a Fedora Core 3 amanda server. I have specified an nfs mounted
directory for one of the holding disks. Does anyone know why amcheck
finds
much less space available on this drive than a command like 'df' does?
You need to explain a
--- Paul Bijnens [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit
:
tanguy yoann wrote:
Perhaps on the one system something other than
amanda/samba
prevents (or causes) this archive bit to flip.
That
You need administrator privilege on the PC to be
able
to reset the archive bit. (At least I think so.
tanguy yoann wrote:
Indeed, in one of my share, the archive bit is cleared
after a full backup, and in the other, it isn't
cleared. I don't understand why. There is the same
files in the two shares. It's very strange.
The same user access with smclient at the two shares.
smclient: command not
Good point, my tape drive maximum sustained data transfer rate is 60 MBytes
per second on a Gigabit ethernet network. Is that too slow?
Amcheck produces:
Amanda Tape Server Host Check
-
WARNING: holding disk /backup/amanda/dumps/dump2: only 88344348 KB free
(104857600
LaValley, Brian E wrote:
Good point, my tape drive maximum sustained data transfer rate is 60 MBytes
per second on a Gigabit ethernet network. Is that too slow?
Maybe. Maybe not.
Those modern drives sometimes (usually) slow down their motors when
the bytes do not flow in fast enough, so that
So, you guys may recall I was having problems with amcheck and amdump
taking ridiculously long. Well, it turns out that because on that client
box, there was a dead Samba mount. As you guys know, when there's a
Samba mount that's timed out, or the remote machine is unavailable, any
operation
--On Wednesday, August 24, 2005 10:11:04 -0600 Graeme Humphries [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
So, you guys may recall I was having problems with amcheck and amdump taking
ridiculously long. Well, it turns out that because on that client box, there
was a dead Samba mount. As you guys know, when
Frank Smith wrote:
I don't think Amanda checks all your mounts. However, many filesystem
operations 'stat' their way up the directory structure to /, and if
you mount things directly in / (such as /remotedir) instead of down
a level (/mnt/remotedir) many of those ops will hang if that mount
is
--On Wednesday, August 24, 2005 11:02:47 -0600 Graeme Humphries [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank Smith wrote:
I don't think Amanda checks all your mounts. However, many filesystem
operations 'stat' their way up the directory structure to /, and if
you mount things directly in / (such as
Frank Smith wrote:
I think Paul's point is valid about tar's one-filesystem flag, I haven't
tried it, but perhaps if you exclude ./tmp it won't stat /tmp/somedir.
The real solution, of course, is to not have hung mounts ;-).
I agree. :)
If you call df with a filename or directory argument
Hi,
In the last few days I've been getting this error:
[/usr/freeware/bin/tar returned 2]
in the sendbackup report on a client running 2.4.4p3-20040805 and the
whole backup run fails. This is the system disk / on the client.
Anyone has run into this before?
The client is an O200 SGI
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:59:03PM -0400, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote:
Hi,
In the last few days I've been getting this error:
[/usr/freeware/bin/tar returned 2]
Return code (exit status) 2 seems, I think, to be reserved by tar
for non-fatal situations from which it can continue doing
For UNIX systems, return code 2 is No such file or directory or File not
found, depending on the OS.
This information is found in the /usr/include/errno.h on most UNIX systems (or
wherever your version of UNIX stores the programming include files). Most
programs will exit with a failure
Indeed, amtape produces the same response. Does this help us to
determine the cause?
Thanks!
On Aug 23, 2005, at 6:49 PM, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 02:04:13PM -0400, James Jacocks wrote:
We are currently experiencing the below issue using
amlabel. I have tried
Thanks for the help, everyone. This was a permissions issue.
Thanks!
On Aug 24, 2005, at 5:02 PM, James Jacocks wrote:
Indeed, amtape produces the same response. Does this help us to
determine the cause?
Thanks!
On Aug 23, 2005, at 6:49 PM, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 05:46:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For UNIX systems, return code 2 is No such file or directory or File not
found,
This information is found in the /usr/include/errno.h on most UNIX systems
Unix standards specify a zero (0) exit status for successful
17 matches
Mail list logo
