Can pre-9.4 IDS really only use 2GB of a tape?
A reader was alarmed by an IDS 9.4 release-note remark that the previous limit was "2GB per storage device" for backups, and asked whether pre-9.4 versions really could only use the first 2GB of a tape. Several users replied no, reporting routine ontape backups of 8GB and ~70GB tapes under 7.2/7.3, 9.2 and 9.3. Others suggested the 2GB figure relates to file-based output (dbexport/onunload, tied to the 32-bit lseek file-size limit) rather than streaming tape devices, though one noted dbexport still failed over 2GB even on 64-bit 9.3. The original poster's follow-up question about why the release notes say this went unanswered, so no definitive explanation is recorded.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement with reference to use of backup storage devices: "(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)." Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this. Andy
Andy Kent wrote:
>The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement
>with reference to use of backup storage devices:
>
>"(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)."
>
>Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a
>tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this.
>
>Andy
>
>
I think you are right, I use 7.2x and 8 GB tape - it uses the whole tape
with ontape.
Michael
Not true .... I backup about 70 GB of data to a SDLT tape every night. "Andy Kent" <andykent@cix.co.uk> wrote in message news:258e719e.0306180743.3baf6bfe@posting.google.com... > The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement > with reference to use of backup storage devices: > > "(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)." > > Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a > tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this. > > Andy
On 18 Jun 2003 08:43:11 -0700, andykent@cix.co.uk (Andy Kent) wrote: We've been backing up about 70GB in 7.3, 9.2, and 9.3. >The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement >with reference to use of backup storage devices: > >"(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)." > >Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a >tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this. > >Andy
Andy Kent wrote:
> The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement
> with reference to use of backup storage devices:
>
> "(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)."
>
> Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a
> tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this.
>
> Andy
This 2GB limit is related dbexport/onunload. It has nothing to do with
the ontape/onbar.
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?comp.databases.informix
To contact in private, remove n-3ospp6am
"Ganesan Subramanian" <gsubrama.news.invalid@web2news.net> writes:
> Andy Kent wrote:
> > The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement
> > with reference to use of backup storage devices:
> >
> > "(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)."
> >
> > Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a
> > tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this.
> >
> > Andy
>
> This 2GB limit is related dbexport/onunload. It has nothing to do with
> the ontape/onbar.
The 2GB limit was the 32-bit limit of the size you can lseek() into a
file. A tape is a raw, streaming device, so there's obviously no
lseek()ing going on in that dept.
--
Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142
President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B
Ronald Cole wrote:
> "Ganesan Subramanian" <gsubrama.news.invalid@web2news.net> writes:
>> Andy Kent wrote:
>>> The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement
>>> with reference to use of backup storage devices:
>>>
>>> "(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)."
>>>
>>> Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a
>>> tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>
>> This 2GB limit is related dbexport/onunload. It has
>> nothing to do with
>> the ontape/onbar.
>
> The 2GB limit was the 32-bit limit of the size you can lseek() into a
> file. A tape is a raw, streaming device, so there's obviously no
> lseek()ing going on in that dept.
It is not only 32 bit isue. Even in IDS9.3 -64bit system, we can't
export a database which is >2GB.
-Ganesan.
--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?comp.databases.informix
Thanks guys. Why would the 9.4 release notes say there was such a limitation then? John Carlson <john_carlson@whsmithusa.com> wrote in message news:<t3b1fvcsnt0ht5lnc8tfnkabt9dedtervp@4ax.com>... > On 18 Jun 2003 08:43:11 -0700, andykent@cix.co.uk (Andy Kent) wrote: > > We've been backing up about 70GB in 7.3, 9.2, and 9.3. > > >The release notes for IDS 9.4 contain the rather alarming statement > >with reference to use of backup storage devices: > > > >"(The previous limit was 2GB per storage device)." > > > >Is this true? Can 9.3 and before really only use the first 2GB of a > >tape? I thought I'd seen people use far more than this. > > > >Andy