On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 11:02:22AM -0500, Ivan Petrovich wrote: > > Also, for this set, I have over 100GB of data, which works out to be > about 30GB (both levels 0 and 1) spread out over a cycle of 4 days and > 5 tapes. Each nightly run takes 4 hours--uncompressed. > > I might try turning on software compression and see if, after one > night of needing 8 hrs to run to gather the compression ratios, it > will settle back to the 4 hr run time. > > But at this point, I also don't have a real need for compression for > the following reasons. Please tell me if you think any of them is > silly. > - I like the idea of a 1-week tape cycle, with only 4 runs and using 5 > tapes each week. I don't wish to make the cycle any smaller because I > like to have several days' worth of backup.
To be accurate, the tapecycle is NOT a time period, it is an integer value, the number of tapes in rotation. Or from amanda's perspective, the number of tapes that must be used before a tape can be used again. In my case I have 18 tapes in rotation and have tapecycle set to 12. Most sites probably have the tapecycle set to equal the actual number of tapes in rotation. The dumpcycle is a time period, the maximum period between level 0's dumps. -- Jon H. LaBadie [EMAIL PROTECTED] JG Computing 4455 Province Line Road (609) 252-0159 Princeton, NJ 08540-4322 (609) 683-7220 (fax)
