Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!iwarp.intel.com!news
From: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: ExaByte Dump commands
Message-ID: <1990Jul16.023707.17650@iwarp.intel.com>
Date: 16 Jul 90 02:37:07 GMT
References: <10542@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Sender: news@iwarp.intel.com
Reply-To: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Lines: 25
In-Reply-To: rogerj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda)

In article <10542@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>, rogerj@batcomputer (Roger Jagoda) writes:
| Should our dump command be more like:
|  
| dump <level>udsf 43200 100000 /dev/nrmt1h <f.system> ?

Here's what my vendor told me to use:

dump <level>dsbf 43000 12000 64 /dev/nrst1 <filesystem>

The "64" can be any multiple of 8 from 8 to 120, but 64 is easy to
remember and document.  This commandline gives sensible figures for
portions of a tape used (204.64MB on 0.09 tapes, for example, said a
recent dump).  Yes, you could use a huge figure for length as well,
unless you plan on having a 2.2GB filesystem. :-)

I've been running with a commandline like this for about eight months
from 13 microvaxen and 40 sun3, sun4, and sun386 machines.  No
problem, as Alf would say.

Just another exabyte hacker,
-- 
/=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III      |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn |
\=Cute Quote: "Welcome to Portland, Oregon, home of the California Raisins!"=/