From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 14 11:10:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6A816A4B3 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.volant.org (gate.volant.org [207.111.218.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071E943FA3 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:10:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from patl+freebsd@volant.org) Received: from 64-144-229-193.client.dsl.net ([64.144.229.193] helo=[192.168.0.13]) by smtp.volant.org with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.22) id 1A9TcU-000CAW-LP; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:10:06 -0700 Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:10:05 -0700 From: Pat Lashley To: Rick Duvall , Mike Hogsett Message-ID: <1229145408.1066155005@mccaffrey.phoenix.volant.org> In-Reply-To: <008d01c3927c$5caae710$f901a8c0@ws21> References: <200310141723.h9EHNJBk016338@quarter.csl.sri.com> <008d01c3927c$5caae710$f901a8c0@ws21> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0b8 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Scan-Signature: 2f0754c78719b3e777a0eabdd9a4ec6fde2533e5 X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Score-Int: -15 X-Spam-Report: -1.5/5.0 This mail has matched the spam-filter tests listed below. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for details about the specific tests reported. In general, the higher the number of total points, the more likely that it actually is spam. (The 'required' number of points listed below is the arbitrary number above which the message is normally considered spam.) Content analysis details: (-1.50 points total, 5 required)header IN_REP_TO (-0.5 points) Has a In-Reply-To header quoted email text REPLY_WITH_QUOTES (-0.5 points) Reply with quoted text AWL (0.5 points) AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Amanda or Bacula X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:10:10 -0000 --On Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:55:32 -0700 Rick Duvall wrote: > So to clarify just so that I understand correctly: > > 1. Each filesystem per system to be backed up qualifies as a dumpfile. > 2. Multiple dumpfiles per backup > 3. Multiple tapes per backup, as long as 1 dumpfile isn't larger than the > tape. > > One of my systems has a 120 gig drive with about 36gigs (and growing) of > people's images, documents, etc on it (samba server). My single tape > drive is only 20 gigs. I am assuming this will be a problem for Amanda > unless I get a bigger tape drive. The AMANDA docs suggest handling this situation by splitting the partition up into multiple tar dumps; each of which will fit on the tape. (I'm currently in the process of tweaking my configs to try this for one of my partitions.) -Pat