Re: Holding disk (feature request)

2001-01-08 Thread Hauke Fath
At 15:15 04.01.01 -0800, Seth D. Mattinen wrote: Add an option that does backups to a holding drive instead of directly to tape. When the holding drive is full or the backup of the client is complete (whichever comes first), transfer the holding drive backup set to a tape backup set. After all is

Re: Holding disk (feature request)

2001-01-08 Thread Hauke Fath
At 10:48 05.01.01 +1100, Michael Kennard wrote: Just a thought, when does it get time to copy to tape, this seems good in theory but I guess it could only be efficient if you can run multiple backup sessions in parallel. Yep. The moment you interleave backups to holding disk and dumping

RE: Holding disk (feature request)

2001-01-05 Thread Nicholas Froome
RE: Holding disk This is something that can be done now; just run one backup to the holding disk, then another from that to tape. If this two-step process was managed by Retrospect (rather than being done with two scripts) it would still have to copy and verify on each pass so there

Re: Holding disk (feature request)

2001-01-04 Thread Michael Kennard
Just a thought, when does it get time to copy to tape, this seems good in theory but I guess it could only be efficient if you can run multiple backup sessions in parallel. I'm not sure about the problem with speed, I think tape drives can keep up with network speeds though I can't tell you

RE: Holding disk (feature request)

2001-01-04 Thread Douglas B. McKay
, 2001 5:36 PM To: retro-talk Subject: Re: Holding disk (feature request) Just a thought, when does it get time to copy to tape, this seems good in theory but I guess it could only be efficient if you can run multiple backup sessions in parallel. I'm not sure about the problem with speed, I think tape