Why isn't dump maximally efficient with TK70 tapes?
George Robbins
grr at cbmvax.commodore.com
Fri Jun 8 23:27:55 AEST 1990
In article <1990Jun8.014252.15749 at watcgl.waterloo.edu> idallen at watcgl.waterloo.edu (Ian! D. Allen [CGL]) writes:
> DUMP: This dump will occupy 1103 (10240 byte) blocks on 0.13 tape(s).
> recorder# time sh -c "dump 0f - / | dd bs=32k rbuf=2 wbuf=2 of=/dev/rmt0h"
^
> That's almost three times faster! Why can't dump be as good as dd?
> Dumps are of major importance; I would have thought that dump would be
> the most clever user of the tape drive. I can't believe this. Am I
> missing something? I must be missing something.
Mostly that dump doesn't document the -b switch to let you specify a more
efficient block size and restore doesn't support it, which makes it a
pain to restore tapes with non-standard block sizes.
--
George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr
but no way officially representing: domain: grr at cbmvax.commodore.com
Commodore, Engineering Department phone: 215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)
More information about the Comp.unix.ultrix
mailing list