At 10:56 AM 10/14/2002 +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
With tar, and some sort of a guarantee that no individual file will
exceed the tape capacity, this can be done by breaking the disklist
entries up into subdirs,
Yes, that's what I'm doing. The problem with this is that something
easily
Hi,
your assumption about the hostnames is correct.
What you are doing is one of the big NO!NO!'s of amanda.
Just like I suspected ;-/
Never list a single host in multiple concurent amanda runs, or,
in your case, with different names in a single amanda configuration.
amandad can only handle on
ere the "fileserv" ones are handled correctly, and vice
versa. Is this a correct assumption? Why does it happen? Is there a way
around it (obviously, I can change the hostname in disklist, but apart
from that)?
--
Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +47 66 85 51 22
Kongsberg Scanners
> Toralf Lund wrote:
>
>>> Toralf Lund wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> No, I don't have those examples. Also, I don't quite recognise the
>> syntax. What version is this example from? 2.4.3? I'm still on
&g
> Toralf Lund wrote:
>
>>> On Monday 14 October 2002 04:56, Toralf Lund wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> >Yes, that's what I'm doing. The problem with this is that
>>> > something easily gets left out as new directories are created.
>>> >
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 10:56:07AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >
> > >With tar,
> > >... , this can be done by breaking the disklist
> > >entries up into subdirs,
> >
> > Yes, that's what I'm doing. The problem with this is tha
> On Monday 14 October 2002 04:56, Toralf Lund wrote:
> [...]
> >Yes, that's what I'm doing. The problem with this is that
> > something easily gets left out as new directories are created.
> >
> >How about
> >
> >1. Allowing wildcards
> On Monday 14 October 2002 03:36, Toralf Lund wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 09:15:34AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> >> > >On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> >> > >> Forgot to mention this earlier
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 09:15:34AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >> Forgot to mention this earlier: I'm not using incrementals at all.
> > >Tapes
> > >> from the same week wi
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:53:55PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >
> > >- As was mentioned earlier, your tapes won't stay synchronized to the
> > >calendar. If Monday is a holiday an
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > Forgot to mention this earlier: I'm not using incrementals at all.
> Tapes
> > from the same week will contain full backups of different directories,
> and
> > a given file is backed up (only)
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:00:22PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > >--On Wednesday, October 09, 2002 16:53:55 +0200 Toralf Lund
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >... . You can take certain tapes out the sequence for permanent
> > >
> --On Wednesday, October 09, 2002 16:53:55 +0200 Toralf Lund
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I think the real question is:
>>
>> How does Amanda decide what tape to use next, and what tapes are
>> considered active, when there are more than "tapec
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:53:55PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > Well, no matter what I do, I need *some* way to label new tapes without
>
> > too many '-f's etc. Also, I know some people are using separate configs
>
> > for permanent backups, but
> On Wednesday 09 October 2002 10:04, Toralf Lund wrote:
> >I've never been quite able to figure out what value to use for
> > tapecycle.
> >
> >I expect to run backups on first 4 days of week, so I've set
> > runspercycle 4
> >
> &
directories as the "normal" ones - seems to me that the best way to
do that is to use the same config.
- Toralf
>
> Michael Martinez
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Toralf Lund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 10:0
I've never been quite able to figure out what value to use for tapecycle.
I expect to run backups on first 4 days of week, so I've set
runspercycle 4
Tapes are labelled
Mon-1
Tue-1
...
Mon-2
...
...
Thu-4
After the fourth "weekly set", the first one is reused, then the 2nd and
3rd. Set
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 11:39:55AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > On 19/04 2002 16:18 Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > > You can do this manually by not changing tapes (or leaving the tape
> > > drive empty) tonight, which will cause all of tonight's dumps to stay
>
Another thing I don't quite understand, is what's the best thing to do
when I get
*** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [[writing file: No space left on device]].
Some dumps may have been left in the holding disk.
Run amflush to flush them to tape.
The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
Well,
As you may have guessed now, I'm in the process of setting up Amanda for
our network (we've been using plain archive backups for far too long.) I
think I have got most of the configuration right, but of course I don't
understand all the details concerning dump cycles etc.
I want my data to be
On 26/04 2002 16:47 Frank Smith wrote:
> --On Friday, April 26, 2002 12:42:31 +0200 Toralf Lund
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Has anyone used Amanda with the Qualstar 4222 tape library? We have a
>> customer that want to use one for backup, and we probably have
Has anyone used Amanda with the Qualstar 4222 tape library? We have a
customer that want to use one for backup, and we probably have to help
with the setup...
--
Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +47 66 85 51 22
Kongsberg Scanners AS +47 66 85 51 00 (switchboard
On 23/04 2002 17:38 Frank Smith wrote:
> --On Tuesday, April 23, 2002 15:26:33 +0200 Toralf Lund
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 23/04 2002 14:52 Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
>
>> Yes, maybe a good decision. (Although the purchase of new tapes and the
>>
On 23/04 2002 14:52 Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 at 1:30pm, Toralf Lund wrote
>
> > Wouldn't append support be easy to implement? Seems to me that most of
> the
> > code must be there already (since Amanda writes several dumps to one
> tape
> &
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 11:39:55AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > On 19/04 2002 16:18 Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > > You can do this manually by not changing tapes (or leaving the tape
> > > drive empty) tonight, which will cause all of tonight's dumps to stay
>
On 22/04 2002 15:08 Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 at 10:09am, Toralf Lund wrote
>
> > Someone mentioned on this list earlier that "exclude list" won't work
> with
> > GNU tar 1.13, and that version 1.13.19 was required. I think I have
>
On 19/04 2002 16:18 Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> > Well, obviously, the simple answer is "run amflush", which is what I
> did
> > the last time I got this. The problem with this was that the flush
> > req
k fine, while on our
SGI clients (which includes the server with most of the file systems) with
tar 1.13 it doesn't.
Anyhow, the big question is: Where does version 1.13.19 come from?
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/tar has nothing newer than 1.13 from 1999.
--
Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Another thing I don't quite understand, is what's the best thing to do
when I get
*** A TAPE ERROR OCCURRED: [[writing file: No space left on device]].
Some dumps may have been left in the holding disk.
Run amflush to flush them to tape.
The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
Well,
[ ... ]
> > So is there any way I can tell Amanda to automatically start dumps
> ahead
> > of schedule if output space permits it. Or is there anything else I can
> do
> > to get the desired effect? I guess I could try with a shorter dump
> cycle,
> > but that might mean that the same data would b
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 at 1:38pm, Toralf Lund wrote
>
> > I want my data to be backed up once a week, and the dump process to run
> on
> > weekdays only, so I've specified
> >
> > dumpcycle 1 week
> >
> > and
> >
> > runspercycle 5
&
As you may have guessed now, I'm in the process of setting up Amanda for
our network (we've been using plain archive backups for far too long.) I
think I have got most of the configuration right, but of course I don't
understand all the details concerning dump cycles etc.
I want my data to be
On 17/04 2002 16:06 Johannes Niess wrote:
> Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is there a way I can set up amanda (2.4.2p2) to allow someone who is
> not
> > the dumpuser to run "amlabel".
> >
> > I'm currently running dumps as
On 13/04 2002 01:58 John R. Jackson wrote:
> >Wouldn't it be simpler to just set a 'starttime' value for all the
> >'unimportant' disks so that all the dumpers will do the 'important'
> >ones first?
>
> But, but, but .. if it doesn't involve a pipe, how can it be Unix??? :-)
>
> Yes, starttime
What exactly controls the order of which file systems are dumped by
Amanda? Based on my brief experience, it looks large filesystems tend to
be taped after the smaller ones included in the run. I guess this is good
in the sense that it ensures *some* data is always backed up, but it's
really b
101 - 135 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
