Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!buengc!wtm
From: wtm@buengc.BU.EDU (W. Thomas Meier)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.encore
Subject: Re: Misc. Umax 4.3 Problems
Message-ID: <6283@buengc.BU.EDU>
Date: 13 Dec 90 18:52:17 GMT
References: <13327@encore.Encore.COM> <13329@encore.Encore.COM> <6253@buengc.BU.EDU> <1990Nov29.021207.4387@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Reply-To: wtm@buengc.bu.edu (W. Thomas Meier)
Followup-To: comp.sys.encore
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Lines: 27

Hi,

Terence removed the files from encore.com:/pub.  Apparently Customer Service
wants to keep a list of sites getting this particular patch.

In reference to my message on multiple dumps to a single volume:  there may
not be a bug after all.

The background is that Operations puts the dump of more than one partition on
a tape volume to save time and resources.  On occasion, more than the average
number of files will be touched so the next incremental may exceed a single
tape volume.  

Last month I was restoring a file from a two volume, multi-partition dump.
My file started on vol 1 and continued to vol 2, or so I thought.  When 
restore complained that it hit the EOT, I mounted the second tape and tried
to continue.  Restore became momentarily confused, lost some data, and then
continued restoring the file.

I concluded that restore had fumbled when in fact it had acted pretty well.
What I didn't know at the time was that Operations forces the incremental 
dump of the effected partition, to start over on a second  tape.  What I 
could have done was to skip volume one and run the restore directly from
volume 2.


_Tom Meier