On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Gena B wrote:
> What I'd like to know about Amanda open source backup is that if it can
> backup MS SQL database in win 2008 server and if it supports backup to tape.
> And if those can be done with amanda backup, I'd like to know then if Amanda
> backup supports
> This is an Amanda forum and it's probably bad form for me to comment about
> Windows stuff here but have you looked at Windows Server Backup:
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754572%28WS.10%29.aspx more
> specifically the wbadmin command line tool here
> http://technet.microso
I don't want to disagree with Steve's assessment. Mostly I think
he's right-on with his comments. However ...
I have on perhaps 5 occassions used 'amrmtape' followed by
'amlabel' to force-clear a tape so that it could re-cycle
"early". Mostly this has occurred in the (thankfully rare) case
of
> Does Amanda backup allow command-line execution? I'm sorry I'm a newbie. I'd
> like to know if it can perform tape backup somehow similar to NTBackup
> utility executed in command line.
>
> My problem is that in my Visual Basic program, I need to automate backup of
> MS SQL database to DATA
brnn8r wrote:
Hi All,
This is my first post on this forum and I'm a bit of a Amanda newb.
At my company we have a Weekly backup regime and after each weekly
backup the tape is sent offsite for storage and the next Weekly tape is
> brought in.
I've just come back from holiday and Amanda i
Hi All,
This is my first post on this forum and I'm a bit of a Amanda newb.
At my company we have a Weekly backup regime and after each weekly backup the
tape is sent offsite for storage and the next Weekly tape is brought in.
I've just come back from holiday and Amanda is expecting our next
I'll attach some debug logs.
For the purposes of this test I cut the disklist file down to two entries:
One entry is a client which is configured to use simple BSD auth.
The other entry is a client which is configured to use bsdtcp auth.
Both of these have been verified by running amcheck disk
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Run 'amadmin disklist' and check the auth is set as expected
for all dles.
I've done this, with the amanda.conf having bsdudp and with it having
bsdtcp for that entry.
In both cases all auth entries for all other DLE's are 'BSD'.
In both cases only that one DLE
Run 'amadmin disklist' and check the auth is set as expected
for all dles.
Jean-Louis
Steve Wray wrote:
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.056: /usr/lib/amanda/runtar: pid 3348
sendbackup: time 0.057: started backup
sendbackup: time 90.352: index t
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Am I to understand that there could be a problem in having 'too many' DLE's
for bsd or bsdudp to cope with?
I never thought of there being a limit to the number of DLE's before... Our
disklist file has 178.
Yes, it's
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
> Am I to understand that there could be a problem in having 'too many' DLE's
> for bsd or bsdudp to cope with?
>
> I never thought of there being a limit to the number of DLE's before... Our
> disklist file has 178.
Yes, it's quite possible, and
Steve Wray wrote:
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Am I to understand that there could be a problem in having 'too
many' DLE's
for bsd or bsdudp to cope with?
I never thought of there being a limit to the number of DLE's
before... Our
disklist fil
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Ah hang on, am I right in understanding that you can't have just one dle
using bsdtcp auth? That they would all have to have it? (ie the inetd
configuration)
Well, all DLEs on a given host have to have the same auth.
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Am I to understand that there could be a problem in having 'too
many' DLE's
for bsd or bsdudp to cope with?
I never thought of there being a limit to the number of DLE's
Steve Wray wrote:
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.056: /usr/lib/amanda/runtar: pid 3348
sendbackup: time 0.057: started backup
sendbackup: time 90.352: index tee cannot write [Broken pipe]
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
> Ah hang on, am I right in understanding that you can't have just one dle
> using bsdtcp auth? That they would all have to have it? (ie the inetd
> configuration)
Well, all DLEs on a given host have to have the same auth. If you
define different
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.056: /usr/lib/amanda/runtar: pid 3348
sendbackup: time 0.057: started backup
sendbackup: time 90.352: index tee cannot write [Broken pipe]
sendbackup: time 9
Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.056: /usr/lib/amanda/runtar: pid 3348
sendbackup: time 0.057: started backup
sendbackup: time 90.352: index tee cannot write [Broken pipe]
sendbackup: time 9
Steve Wray wrote:
On the client, in the sendbackup.20100106012630.debug log I see:
sendbackup-gnutar: time 0.056: /usr/lib/amanda/runtar: pid 3348
sendbackup: time 0.057: started backup
sendbackup: time 90.352: index tee cannot write [Broken pipe]
sendbackup: time 90.352: pid 3346 finish time W
Steve Wray wrote:
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
I suspect an estimate or data timeout. Have you tried increasing
dtimeout and etimeout?
etimeout 2000
dtimeout 2000
I'd be surprised. These seem like fairly substantial values. 2000
seconds is roughly half an hour. I'll increase them by another 1
Jean-Louis,
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:27:29AM -0500, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
> In case of hard failure, the post_dle_* scripts are not executed and the
> snapshot are not removed, you must removed them manually.
Not unreasonable, I'd just wanted to ask
- a situation we will strive to avoi
In case of hard failure, the post_dle_* scripts are not executed and the
snapshot are not removed, you must removed them manually.
Jean-Louis
Brian Cuttler wrote:
Jean-Louis,
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:15:48AM -0500, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
Amanda should remove the snapshot. It's a bu
Jean-Louis,
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:15:48AM -0500, Jean-Louis Martineau wrote:
> Amanda should remove the snapshot. It's a bug if it doesn't.
>
> The pre_dle_* scripts create the snapshot and the post_dle_* scripts
> remove them. Do you configured the post_dle_* scripts?
I'm not sure how to
Amanda should remove the snapshot. It's a bug if it doesn't.
The pre_dle_* scripts create the snapshot and the post_dle_* scripts
remove them. Do you configured the post_dle_* scripts?
Jean-Louis
Brian Cuttler wrote:
Amanda 2.6.1p1 on Solaris 10/x86.
We have been running great! However beca
Amanda 2.6.1p1 on Solaris 10/x86.
We have been running great! However because of problems outside
the scope of amanda, our work area failing, we have moved the
work area to a portion of our ZFS file system.
This has worked great for us, however (why is there always a but
or however...) for reaso
26 matches
Mail list logo
