Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 May 1996 20:41:32 +0200 (MET DST)
From:      Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl>
To:        andreas@knobel.gun.de (Andreas Klemm)
Cc:        joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: dump and 32blocks limit
Message-ID:  <199605251841.UAA03599@yedi.iaf.nl>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.92.960525105145.594A-100000@knobel.gun.de> from "Andreas Klemm" at May 25, 96 10:57:17 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Fri, 24 May 1996, Wilko Bulte wrote:
> 
> > > As Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not absolutely sure this is SCSI-only related but:
> > > >
> > > > I grabbed the -current dump sources and found a 32 block  limit builtin
> > > > there. Comment sez: restore can't read >32, maybe a bug in the tapedriver.
> > > >
> > > > I was aware of 64kbyte rawio limit, but this 32 is new to me. I ran
> > > > dumps with 128 (== 64kbyte) and never had restore nuke me.
> > >
> > > The claim with the 32 KB blocking was Andreas Klemm's one.
> >
> > Andreas,
> > 	Any more info on this??
> 
> Well, sometimes I had a SUN 4mm DAT (Archive Python) at home.
> When doing backups with dump everything seemed to be fine. I could
> choose blocksizes of about 96 blocks (as it's usual on Sun's).
> 
> But when I tried to read those tapes with restore, I got an error
> message (forgot which exactly), you could perhaps browse the -current
> list for my e-mail... The result was, that I was only able to restore
> dumps that were made with a blocksize <= 64 blocks if I remember
> exactly.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.... The thing is I _never_ saw it on my tape units (I
have a couple, you probably saw the list on -scsi go by).

So, I'm wondering if it is really a sw bug or it is a device-specific
FreeBSD interaction. I've seen far too much strange errors coming
from crappy firmware in devices.

> Untli this bug is fixed somewhere in kernel land I had the idea to
> disallow blocksizes >64 blocks in dump ... I think people wouldn't find
> it funny, if they are unable to restore their backups in case they
> saved the time of verifying a dump ;-))

I agree a readable dump is strongly preferable :^)

This gets back to my question posted sometime ago: how does one
verify a dump??? That is, without actually restoring it.. Correct
me if I'm wrong but I did not see any options to do this.

(Of course you need a _really_ quiescent filesystem to make this work)

If a more or less painless 'compare' is feasible, I can try to do some
testing with the various tapehardware. I can borrow I think some 10
types of different tape units from my boss (QIC, Exabyte, DAT, DLT).

> Don't ask me, what's exactly the reason for this ... Was this broken
> in 1.1.5.1, too ??? I don't know...
> 
> 	Andreas ///

Wilko
_     __________________________________________________________________________
 |   / o / /  _   Wilko Bulte             email: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl
 |/|/ / / /( (_)  Private FreeBSD site  - Arnhem - The Netherlands
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605251841.UAA03599>