Eric Bollengier wrote:
> Le Friday 07 November 2008 14:36:46 Kern Sibbald, vous avez écrit :
>> On Friday 07 November 2008 13:19:45 Ralf Gross wrote:
>>> Kern Sibbald schrieb:
On Thursday 06 November 2008 22:47:41 Ralf Gross wrote:
> Alex Chekholko schrieb:
>> On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:12:
On Friday 07 November 2008 10:55:57 Ulrich Leodolter wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 22:20 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 November 2008 22:02:26 Alex Chekholko wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:12:51 +0100
> > >
> > > Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > For writing to tap
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 22:20 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Thursday 06 November 2008 22:02:26 Alex Chekholko wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:12:51 +0100
> >
> > Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > For writing to tape (providing it is LTO-n) I strongly recommend a block
> > > size not to
On Thursday 06 November 2008 22:02:26 Alex Chekholko wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:12:51 +0100
>
> Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For writing to tape (providing it is LTO-n) I strongly recommend a block
> > size not to exceed 256K.
>
> Hi Kern,
>
> Why do you say that?
It is my exp
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:12:51 +0100
Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For writing to tape (providing it is LTO-n) I strongly recommend a block size
> not to exceed 256K.
>
Hi Kern,
Why do you say that? Is this thread relevant?:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01246.htm
John Drescher wrote:
>> tape compression was on
>>
>
> I would repeat these tests with the raid device as a source instead of
> /dev/zero. The reason is that /dev/zero will compress so well on a
> tape drive that you really are not writing much to the tape.
>
> John
>
Otherwise create a big fil
> tape compression was on
>
I would repeat these tests with the raid device as a source instead of
/dev/zero. The reason is that /dev/zero will compress so well on a
tape drive that you really are not writing much to the tape.
John
On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 08:51 -0500, John Drescher wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/nst1 bs=4k count=256k
> > 262144+0 records in
> > 262144+0 records out
> > 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 48.2057 seconds, 22.3 MB/s
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/nst
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/nst1 bs=4k count=256k
> 262144+0 records in
> 262144+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 48.2057 seconds, 22.3 MB/s
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/nst1 bs=64k count=64k
> 65536+0 records in
> 65536+0 records out
> 4294
