Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Robert Heller
At Sun, 3 Oct 2010 14:19:50 -0500 "Dustin J. Mitchell" wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > > One of the downsides of using a very *stable* Linux distro with long > > term stable support.  OTOH, it avoids the fun of re-installing > > everything every 6-12 months

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Dustin J. Mitchell
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > One of the downsides of using a very *stable* Linux distro with long > term stable support.  OTOH, it avoids the fun of re-installing > everything every 6-12 months and then spending a couple of months > getting all of the settings tweaked ju

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Robert Heller
At Sun, 3 Oct 2010 11:37:25 -0500 "Dustin J. Mitchell" wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Robert Heller wrote: > > Also I am pretty much stuck with 2.5.0, since that is what comes with > > CentOS... (I don't at this point want to 'experiment' with a bleeding > > edge self-built packag

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Dustin J. Mitchell
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Robert Heller wrote: > Also I am pretty much stuck with 2.5.0, since that is what comes with > CentOS... (I don't at this point want to 'experiment' with a bleeding > edge self-built package, not for something like this.) Yikes, you may be *very* out of luck, then

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Robert Heller
At Sun, 3 Oct 2010 10:11:57 -0500 "Dustin J. Mitchell" wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > > I picked a 'virtual' tape size to match the capacity of a DVD-R: 4.3Gig, > > with the idea of migrating the fulls and the more major incrs to DVD-Rs > > for long-term arch

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-03 Thread Dustin J. Mitchell
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > I picked a 'virtual' tape size to match the capacity of a DVD-R: 4.3Gig, > with the idea of migrating the fulls and the more major incrs to DVD-Rs > for long-term archival. Ah! You should take a look at both the dvdrw device (for writing to

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Jon LaBadie
Robert, I had another thought. You could set all your DLEs to be set to do incremental only. I forget whether this is "strategy nofull" or "strategy incronly" or ???. With this you may be able to set you runtapes to 1 and maybe use a larger tape size as you would not be archiving them to DVDs.

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Robert Heller
At Sat, 2 Oct 2010 16:06:17 -0500 "Dustin J. Mitchell" wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > > So I would be better off setting runtapes to 1?  And then manually > > 'flushing' at the beginning of the cycle to deal with the larger fulls? > > > > Arg... > > > > This

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Dustin J. Mitchell
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > So I would be better off setting runtapes to 1?  And then manually > 'flushing' at the beginning of the cycle to deal with the larger fulls? > > Arg... > > This sort of thing is not really well explained in the man pages... True. The problem

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Robert Heller
At Sat, 2 Oct 2010 10:59:38 -0500 "Dustin J. Mitchell" wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Jon LaBadie wrote: > >> runtapes 2 # number of tapes to be used in a single run of amdump > > > > I hope very few dumps take more than one tape, like none :) > > To be clear on the planner's reas

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Dustin J. Mitchell
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Jon LaBadie wrote: >> runtapes 2 # number of tapes to be used in a single run of amdump > > I hope very few dumps take more than one tape, like none :) To be clear on the planner's reasoning: it considers itself to have runtapes * tapetype:length kb available to pl

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Robert Heller
At Sat, 02 Oct 2010 10:15:29 -0400 amanda-users@amanda.org wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 09:05:44AM -0400, Robert Heller wrote: > > Why does Amanda do multiple level 0 backups? I only want 1 (and only > > 1) level 0 backup (of any given disk) in the backup cycle (4 weeks / 28 > > days). Th

Re: Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 09:05:44AM -0400, Robert Heller wrote: > Why does Amanda do multiple level 0 backups? I only want 1 (and only > 1) level 0 backup (of any given disk) in the backup cycle (4 weeks / 28 > days). The documentation for the bump* parameters is not clear (to > me). I want Amand

Confused by amanda's 'planner': why multiple level 0?

2010-10-02 Thread Robert Heller
Why does Amanda do multiple level 0 backups? I only want 1 (and only 1) level 0 backup (of any given disk) in the backup cycle (4 weeks / 28 days). The documentation for the bump* parameters is not clear (to me). I want Amanda to aggressively bump dump levels. I don't have enough virtual tapes