Does increasing tapebufs improve the speed in which amanda dump to disk ?
No.
I thought tapebufs was only for dumping to tape ?
Yes.
Gerhard
John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How does one configure the blocksize?
Marc was (I assume) referring to old, crufty, icky, by hand scripts he
used in the far past, not wonderful, shiny Amanda :-). I fully intend
to ignore the fact that they were faster :-).
I think what he meant was he changed the 'b' flag value on the dump,
* John R. Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:20:30PM -0500)
I have always wondered .. why does amanda pipe ufsdump output to ufsrestore
before sending it to the tape device?
It's collecting the index data.
The dump (or tar) output pipeline is rather complicated. The image
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, John R. Jackson wrote:
But you're comparing apples and oranges. As you've noted, going from
disk to tape on the same machine gets 3 MBytes/s whether you are using
ufsdump or Amanda is using taper to copy a holding disk image.
But that's not what happens when Amanda
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: why | ufsrestore?
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, John R. Jackson wrote:
But you're comparing apples and oranges. As you've noted, going from
disk to tape on the same machine gets 3 MBytes/s whether you are using
ufsdump or Amanda is using taper to copy
I have always wondered .. why does amanda pipe ufsdump output to ufsrestore
before sending it to the tape device?
It's collecting the index data.
The dump (or tar) output pipeline is rather complicated. The image data
goes back to sendbackup who in turn tee's it to the restore program
to
I have always wondered .. why does amanda pipe ufsdump output to
ufsrestore
before sending it to the tape device?
It's collecting the index data.
John, thanks for clarifying...
If amanda is dumping direct to tape (file systems that are
bigger than the
holding disk), I'm lucky if i get
