- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-24-2006 04:24 AM
тАО04-24-2006 04:24 AM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
You can use the BACKUP /TRUNCATE switch in to truncate files at [EOF] when restoring to your newly initialized disk. The default behavior of BACKUP will be to restore the file with the previous allocation.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-24-2006 12:51 PM
тАО04-24-2006 12:51 PM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-24-2006 03:37 PM
тАО04-24-2006 03:37 PM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-24-2006 10:08 PM
тАО04-24-2006 10:08 PM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
please check your "new" clustersize.
If it is back to 1372 (which I suspect) then you probably did NOT add /NOINIT to your BACKUP, and that undid YOUR init by re-initialysing the disk with the setting out of the saveset..
Also, please re-read Hein's last question.
Do you have a COMPELLING reason for so large a RAIDset? And by compelling I mean: a single file too big (or expected to grow as much) to fit onto a single drive? In which case, a big clustersize actually would be an advantage.
But for your many small files, there is NO reason to put them on a big device (or RAIDset), but many reasons to use smaller devices. (not the least of those: manageable BACKUP savesets and rstore procedures)
Should you have an applic that mixes both, then it is REALLY worth the effort of implementing clever choices of Logical Names, maybe by using search lists.
Should you need help on that, then please supply some details.
hth
Proost.
Have one on me (maybe in May in Nashua?)
jpe
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-24-2006 11:38 PM
тАО04-24-2006 11:38 PM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
The only reason we have for the very large raid sets is the footprint we have for the cab. with the need for a LOT of small files.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-25-2006 12:08 AM
тАО04-25-2006 12:08 AM
Re: Disk Cluster Size too Large
The only reason we have for the very large raid sets is the footprint we have for the cab. with the need for a LOT of small files.
I do not quite get that argument.
On exactly the same footprint, using the same physical drives, it is also possible to present "any" reasonable number of smaller units, with the same total storage.
fwiw
Proost.
Have one on me (maybe in May in Nashua?)
jpe
- « Previous
- Next »