HP3000-L Archives

October 2003, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
STORE problem. Why a second tape?
From:
Mark Sprowls <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mark Sprowls <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:13:29 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines) 
We have implemented a new total backup job for one of our customers, and it
now wants a second tape.  The old job still requires one tape.  The old job
did the following:

:FILE TOTBKXL;DEV=TAPE
:STORE @[log in to unmask]@;*TOTBKXL;DIRECTORY

The new job does the following:

:FILE T;DEV=TAPE;LABEL=SYSBKP
:BUILD STROUT;REC=-150,,F,ASCII;DISC=10000000;TEMP
:STORE @[log in to unmask]@;*T;DIRECTORY;PROGRESS=2 > STROUT

The differences are:
*The new job uses a labeled tape
*The new job uses the PROGRESS option
*The new job redirects the STORE output to a file to be checked for errors

Does anyone see any reason why one of these differences would cause the
backup now to span two tapes?  The customer says they are using only 125m
DDS tapes.

Any help is much appreciated!

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2