Xref: utzoo comp.unix.i386:5538 comp.unix.questions:22614
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekcrl!tekgvs!keithe
From: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Tape backup performance on 386 ISA/EISA systems
Keywords: tape, performance, 386
Message-ID: <7596@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 2 Jun 90 01:06:07 GMT
References: <1990May25.123302.26061@virtech.uucp>
Reply-To: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Followup-To: comp.unix.i386
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 13

In article <1990May25.123302.26061@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
<30MB and be backed up using the following command (so that everybody
<uses the same mechanism):
<
<	/bin/time sh -c "find . -print | cpio -oBcC 10240 > /dev/rmt0"
<
<Note that you may adjust the block size (10240) as you feel is appropriate
<for your system as long as you tell me what you used.  

Doesn't cpio bitch about the inclusion of both the "B" and "C 10240" command
tail?  They're redundant/competing flags to cpio...  ("B" == "C 512").

kEITHe